easymancfc:



Paul doesn't mention Africa or Ethiopia in Romans...
Secondly Paul was making a general statement...
Romans 1:18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and wickedness of MEN who by their wickedness suppress the truth.

The letter to the romans was to the Christians in Rome.. THERE IS A BIG DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE CHRISTIANS IN ROME AND THE ROMAN EMPIRE... THE WE CALL THAT BOOK LETTER TO THE ROMANS, THESE ARE NOT THE ROMANS WHO PERSECUTED CHRISTIANS AND WORSHIPPED A PANTHEON OF GODS.. NOTE THE DIFFERENCE...

lastly, When Romans was written.. there was no taught of Haile Selassie or any other Ethiopian. Ethiopian Christianity is not superior to those who preceded and founded it...
And p.s. the title of "defender of the faith" has been used long before Hailey Selassie used it.. SO ITS NOT UNIQUE TO HIM

I still await proof that the Ethiopian orthodox Tawahedo canon predates Hippo and Carthage...

NO NEED FOR FOUL LANGUAGE.. PLEASE KEEP IT CIVIL..

Look at the Quote below, it is Haile Selassie I's statements on the Bible... Are you saying to me that the King has lied by claiming that we in Ethiopia have one of the Oldest versions of the Bible?

That statement, along with the eternal fact contained in Genesis 2:13 is all the proof you need! [b][/b]


Haile Selassie I -On the Bible

We in Ethiopia have one of the oldest versions of the Bible, but however old
the version may be, in whatever language it may be written, the word
remains one and the same. It transcends all boundaries of empires and all
conceptions of race. It is eternal.

No doubt you all remember reading in the Acts of the Apostles of how Philip
baptised the Ethiopian official. He is the first Ethiopian on record to have
followed Christ, and from that day onwards the Word of God has continued
to grow in the hearts of Ethiopians. And I might say for myself that from
early childhood I was taught to appreciate the Bible and my love for it
increases with the passage of time. All through my troubles I have found it a
cause of infinite comfort. "Come unto Me, all ye that labour and are heavy
laden, and I will give you rest" ~ Who can resist an invitation so full of
compassion?

Because of this personal experience in the goodness of the Bible, I was
resolved that all my countrymen should also share its great blessing, and
that by reading the Bible they should find Truth for themselves. Therefore,
I caused a new translation to be made from our ancient language into the
language which the old and the young understood and spoke.

Today man sees all his hopes and aspirations crumbling before him. He is
perplexed and knows not whither he is drifting. But he must realise that the
Bible is his refuge, and the rallying point for all humanity. In it man will
find the solution of his present difficulties and guidance for his future
action, and unless he accepts with clear conscience the Bible and its great
Message, he cannot hope for salvation. For my part I glory in the Bible.

Haile Selassie I

You are just taking yourself round and round in a vicious circle!
I never stated that Paul was referring to Haile Selassie I, nor did I assert that Paul was speaking about Ethiopians; please don't try and come and muddle up the waters here.

I have asked you to show me where you previously debunked my evidence and reasoning as incorrect you have not done so.
I have also reminded you about the Book of Romans and you are going here and going there and mixing up the reasoning, you know not what you are on about.

So how comes Psalm 87 did not mention Antioch and Rome etc as the Foundation of God and as the land where this man (JAH) was born? Or are you saying that Psalm 87 says JAH will be born in Ethiopia, and nevertheless some other regions of the world possess spiritual and religious texts that predate that Ethiopia where Psalm 87 says that God will manifest in flesh? Huh?

What proof are you still awaiting, the proof is there for you just open a Bible (with clean hands and a pure heart of course) flip the pages to Genesis Chatper 2 verse 13 and that is all the proof that you need. Adam and Eve were placed iin the Garden of Eden which had River Nile near it, a branch/Tributary of which runs through Ethiopia , end of story.

What that passage in Genesis tells us is that all civilisation was based on that origin, be it Social, Spiritual, Religious, Academic, I say ALL!!!
Unless you want to tell us that God made Adam and Eve in Ethiopia and then God left them without teachings/Texts/Canons etc

Whatever religious/spiritual teachings the Ethiopians have, be it oral or written invariably predates whatever comes after!

Again, please focus on my reasoning and do not attempt to re-arrange, re-shape, re-word or mis-construe my answers
At no point did I mention anything about whether the Title "Defender of the Faith" was unique to Haile Selassie I or not. Instead, I had very politely asked you if you though He bore that Title as a convenient Title. So please, when dealing with Rasta come straight and come clean. Repeat ONLY what you have heard Rasta say, and exactly as Rasta has said it.

You are well within your right to share such knowledge about the uniqueness or lack of uniqueness of the Defender ofthe Faith Title; And if it is not so unique, how comes[b] Alafin of Oyo in Nigeria [/b] is not confered with that Holy Title? That shows you its relevance.

So as I have repeatedly stated, the proof is in Genesis 2:13 and Psalm 87 if that is not enough for you then I can't wake up a man who is enjoying his act by pretending to be asleep; and I won't even attempt to do so if paid!



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rVr_Iy0oOX8

Tampinu:


Look at the Quote below, it is Haile Selassie I's statements on the Bible... Are you saying to me that the King has lied by claiming that we in Ethiopia have one of the Oldest versions of the Bible?
that's the Key word.. One of the Oldest... not the oldest or the first....

Tampinu:


That statement, along with the eternal fact contained in Genesis 2:13 is all the proof you need! [b][/b

I don't see what you are saying.. Ethiopia is mentioned with reference with river Gihon that encompasses it.. Ethiopia was not the topic of discussion, The context talks about the River that flowed out of Eden and how it parted to form four rivers and each river is mentioned with respect to the land it is found..
River Pison to the land of Havilah.
River Gihon to the land of Ethiopia
River Hiddekel to Assyria
only River Euphrates wasnt mentioned with a place...
There's nothing here about Ethiopia being the cradle of Christianity, and God made contact with Noah, Abraham etc after Adam and non of them was recorded to be from Ethiopia. Instead God chose Israel as his own nation from Jacob...

Tampinu:


Haile Selassie I -On the Bible

We in Ethiopia have one of the oldest versions of the Bible, but however old
the version may be, in whatever language it may be written, the word
remains one and the same..

He's right... He said one of the oldest not the oldest or that Ethiopia compiled the Bible first..

Tampinu:


It transcends all boundaries of empires and all
conceptions of race. It is eternal.

Amen! I completely agreed..

Tampinu:


No doubt you all remember reading in the Acts of the Apostles of how Philip
baptised the Ethiopian official. He is the first Ethiopian on record to have
followed Christ, and from that day onwards the Word of God has continued
to grow in the hearts of Ethiopians.

Again he is right... So before the Ethiopian Eunuch, there was no Christianity in Ethiopia... and he didn't even become a Christian in Ethiopia but in Jerusalem, where Christianity started and spread after Pentecost...

Tampinu:


And I might say for myself that from
early childhood I was taught to appreciate the Bible and my love for it
increases with the passage of time. All through my troubles I have found it a
cause of infinite comfort. "Come unto Me, all ye that labour and are heavy
laden, and I will give you rest" ~ Who can resist an invitation so full of
compassion?

Because of this personal experience in the goodness of the Bible, I was
resolved that all my countrymen should also share its great blessing, and
that by reading the Bible they should find Truth for themselves.

Beautiful.. wonderful...

Tampinu:


Therefore, I caused a new translation to be made from our ancient language into the language which the old and the young understood and spoke.

So the bible was not written or compiled by Ethiopians, Selassie made a TRANSLATION from Greek and Hebrew (original bible language) into Ethiopian dialect...NOT THAT ETHIOPIA FOUNDED CHRISTIANITY OR FIRST COMPILED THE BIBLE... THEY TRANSLATED, THEY DIDN'T COMPILE...

Tampinu:

Today man sees all his hopes and aspirations crumbling before him. He is
perplexed and knows not whither he is drifting. But he must realise that the
Bible is his refuge, and the rallying point for all humanity. In it man will
find the solution of his present difficulties and guidance for his future
action, and unless he accepts with clear conscience the Bible and its great
Message, he cannot hope for salvation. For my part I glory in the Bible.

Haile Selassie I

Again... good...

Tampinu:


You are just taking yourself round and round in a vicious circle!
I never stated that Paul was referring to Haile Selassie I, nor did I assert that Paul was speaking about Ethiopians; please don't try and come and muddle up the waters here.

You said Romans 1:26 is what gives Ethiopia the right.. because it saved Christianity from the Romans and that Selassie is the saviour..
you are the one mincing words and providing circular arguments...

Tampinu:

I have asked you to show me where you previously debunked my evidence and reasoning as incorrect you have not done so.

the link is there.. go and read the thread..

Tampinu:

I have also reminded you about the Book of Romans and you are going here and going there and mixing up the reasoning, you know not what you are on about.

My dear I have history and Bible commentaries to back me up.. all you have is Rastafarian jargon and passive mentions of Ethiopia.

So how comes Psalm 87 did not mention Antioch and Rome etc as the Foundation of God and as the land where this man (JAH) was born? Or are you saying that Psalm 87 says JAH will be born in Ethiopia, and nevertheless some other regions of the world possess spiritual and religious texts that predate that Ethiopia where Psalm 87 says that God will manifest in flesh? Huh?

[/quote]
Psalm 87 talks about Jerusalem not Ethiopia.. Ethiopia was mentioned in passing.. God manifested in flesh in Bethlehem Judea not Ethiopia (read your bible)

Tampinu:


What proof are you still awaiting, the proof is there for you just open a Bible (with clean hands and a pure heart of course) flip the pages to Genesis Chatper 2 verse 13 and that is all the proof that you need. Adam and Eve were placed iin the Garden of Eden which had River Nile near it, a branch/Tributary of which runs through Ethiopia , end of story.

The only proof there is that a river runs through Ethiopia, BUT WHAT HAS THAT GOT TO DO WITH ANYTHING.. the rivers passes through three other places..
THIS DOESN'T PROVE ANYTHING.... ITS LAUGHABLE ACTUALLY

Tampinu:


What that passage in Genesis tells us is that all civilisation was based on that origin, be it Social, Spiritual, Religious, Academic, I say ALL!!!
Unless you want to tell us that God made Adam and Eve in Ethiopia and then God left them without teachings/Texts/Canons etc

Lol.. so because river Gihon one of the four rivers passed through Ethiopia.. therefore it is the cradle of civilization... The river passes through other places.. are they also cradle of civilization??.. That logic is so poor that it is not worth mentioning.. Canaan was not mention, Jerusalem was not mentioned, Israel was not mentioned yet the bible records that God gave those places to his people and Jesus came from that nation..

Tampinu:

Whatever religious/spiritual teachings the Ethiopians have, be it oral or written invariably predates whatever comes after!

Before Christianity came.. the Ethiopians were pagans..

Tampinu:


Again, please focus on my reasoning and do not attempt to re-arrange, re-shape, re-word or mis-construe my answers
At no point did I mention anything about whether the Title "Defender of the Faith" was unique to Haile Selassie I or not. Instead, I had very politely asked you if you though He bore that Title as a convenient Title. So please, when dealing with Rasta come straight and come clean. Repeat ONLY what you have heard Rasta say, and exactly as Rasta has said it.

You are well within your right to share such knowledge about the uniqueness or lack of uniqueness of the Defender ofthe Faith Title; And if it is not so unique, how comes[b] Alafin of Oyo in Nigeria [/b] is not confered with that Holy Title? That shows you its relevance.

So as I have repeatedly stated, the proof is in Genesis 2:13 and Psalm 87 if that is not enough for you then I can't wake up a man who is enjoying his act by pretending to be asleep; and I won't even attempt to do so if paid!



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rVr_Iy0oOX8

He might have had the title but you want to make it seem like because he had that title then Ethiopian Christianity is what you say it Is... which is a false notion...
That title has been in use before Selassie
King Henry VIII of England and Ireland, King James V of Scotland had that title in the 16th century.. _more than 300 years before Selassie was born..
look it up..
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fidei_defensor
So the Title didnt start with Selassie...

Like I have pointed out.. Gen 2:13 and psalm 87 doesn't prove anything other than mention Ethiopia (along with other kingdoms) passively

easymancfc:

He might have had the title but you want to make it seem like because he had that title then Ethiopian Christianity is what you say it Is... which is a false notion...
That title has been in use before Selassie
King Henry VIII of England and Ireland, King James V of Scotland had that title in the 16th century.. _more than 300 years before Selassie was born..
look it up..
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fidei_defensor
So the Title didnt start with Selassie...

Like I have pointed out.. Gen 2:13 and psalm 87 doesn't prove anything other than mention Ethiopia (along with other kingdoms) passively

Ok, I see your reply.

So Psalms Chapter what did it say that God has Chosen Kent, England as His foundation as it did Ethiopia in Psalm 87?
Because it appears you seem to fail to see the connect between the fact that Ethiopia is first country mentioned in the Bible
(Not along some ancient civilizations-as if they were all mentioned FIRST at the same time-I repeat Ethiopia is the first country mentioned in the Bible, FIRST means FIRST, FIRST does not mean along with some other ....)
That is a virtue called "Intellectual Honesty". The ability to say "Yes, you are right it is the first etc".
Not for somneone to say, "Yes, it's the first so?" That is evasive and childish. And with those who reason without depth I do not associate.

As if it is not logically consistent that if Psalm 87 says Ethiopia is God's country and Ethiopia is the First country mentioned in the Bible, how likely is the possibility that Ethiopia have the oldest version of the Christian Holy Books?

You have not pointed out anything Re: dismissing the fact the Ethiopia is the first country mentioned in the Bible.
First you came across as if it did not matter that Ethiopia was first country mentioned in the Bible, then you returned and made as if there was a cluster of countries named as FIRST in the Bible and Ethiopia just happened to be one of them. (Sigh)

Look, I have given my conclusive answer to all your questions on this matter by providing Haile Selassie's comments on the Bible; The King has spoken, it remains to see who will overturn the King's words. is it you? The king says WE IN ETHIOPIA HAVE ONE OF THE OLDEST VERSIONS OF THE BIBLE! (It's a humble, Noble and Polite way of saying WE HAVE THE OLDEST VERSION)

What are you defending? You calling my King a liar? Not even the Pope or the Catholic church EVER raised a challenge to His Majesty's comments on the Bible, as it is final. Then you expect me to be struggling to wake up one who is pretending to be sleeping. No man!.

Have a nice weekend and enjoy yourself. I rest my case.

If this is about winning arguments I agree that you have won and Rome is where Christianity began and Rome and Antioch have the oldest Bible as well as the Canon.

Many Thanks

easymancfc:


According to the Bible, It was the stone tablets that was in the ark not the whole old testament
Kjv
Heb 9:4which had the golden censer, and the ark of the covenant overlaid round about with gold, wherein was the golden pot that had manna, and Aaron's rod that budded, and the TABLES OF THE CONVENANT;

Are the stone tablet not part of the Pentateuch? Yes, the stone tablets and the rest of the Pentateuch was probably preserved in the Ark. Read Deuteronomy 10:5; 2 Kings 22:8; 2 Chronicles 34:14

easymancfc:


I never told you that the catholic Church compiled the old testament.. WHAT I SAID WAS THAT THE CATHOLIC CHURCH ADOPTED THE SEPTUAGINT TRANSLATION OF THE OLD TESTAMENT...

And you want me to rely on the Septuagint translation of the apocryphal which was done in the 5th century?

easymancfc:


Like I have pointed out.. there are several old testament scriptures which Jesus and the apostles did. not quote from... Jesus did not quote from Songs of Solomon..Esther, Judges Nahum, Obadiah, Esther Joshua, Ruth..

Jesus scanned through the whole of the 39 books of the OT including the ones mentioned up there. See Luke 11:51; 24:44

easymancfc:


SECONDLY, WHERE DOES IT SAY THAT JESUS HAS TO QUOTE FROM A BOOK FOR IT TO BE SCRIPTURE..
There are many allusions to the deuterocanonica in the new testament...

Didn't you say that Jesus and His apostles quoted from it? You are yet to show me where.

easymancfc:


Jude 1:9 is not referenced from any of your 39 book old testament...

Was it referenced from any of the apocryphal books?

easymancfc:


Rev 8:2 talks about 7 angels standing before God the only other place you find a reference like that is in tobit 12:15..

there are many other examples..

The book of Revelation is what was divinely received from God. The apocrypha even by its own admission was written in a period when God was silent for 400 years. The book of Enoch you always use as an example is not apocrypha neither is it canonical but parts of it contains certain amounts of divine truths as revealed in the passage you quoted above.

[quote author=Tampinu post=60737415]

YOU AND I HAVE DEBATED THE ISSUE OF ETHIOPIA AND ROME IN A DIFFERENT THREAD AND I SHOWED HOW INACCURATE YOUR INFORMATION WAS...
in everything you pasted you failed to show that the Ethiopian canon came before the Catholic canon.
.
I know the Ethiopian canon has 81 books with the book of Enoch and jubilees etc ... according to your post... the current 81 book version was published in 1986...
Show me that the Ethiopian canon came before 393 (council of hippo) and I will believe you.. simple...NO NEED TO COPY AND PASTE THE WHOLE WIKIPEDIA... BUT DO IT WITH GOOD SOURCES

What's there to " debate " about Ethiopia and Rome? There is co comparing the two cities, one is God's own country and the other is the porn-thief's own territory. There are numerous reports of child abuse and molestation by the Catholic priests. That's why its called pontiff or porn-thief.

There's no debating Ethiopia and Rome, For to compare Ethiopia with Rome is like comparing sleep with death!


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fwihu7o6YxM&t=608s

easymancfc:



I don't see what you are saying.. Ethiopia is mentioned with reference with river Gihon that encompasses it.. Ethiopia was not the topic of discussion, The context talks about the River that flowed out of Eden and how it parted to form four rivers and each river is mentioned with respect to the land it is found..
River Pison to the land of Havilah.
River Gihon to the land of Ethiopia
River Hiddekel to Assyria
only River Euphrates wasnt mentioned with a place...
There's nothing here about Ethiopia being the cradle of Christianity, and God made contact with Noah, Abraham etc after Adam and non of them was recorded to be from Ethiopia. Instead God chose Israel as his own nation from Jacob...

I repeat, and for the final time. The mere fact that Ethiopia is the first country/Kingdom mentioned in the Bible means that Ethiopia is the root and fruit of Christianity. You do not have to agree and you are within your rights to disagree but I will not go back to that particular topic. And that, is that, about that!


He's right... He said one of the oldest not the oldest or that Ethiopia compiled the Bible first..

Amen! I completely agreed..


Again he is right... So before the Ethiopian Eunuch, there was no Christianity in Ethiopia... and he didn't even become a Christian in Ethiopia but in Jerusalem, where Christianity started and spread after Pentecost...

Where is Jerusalem? Oh, ok, I hear your reply....see my next question below....

Where is the NEW Jerusalem?

Beautiful.. wonderful...

So the bible was not written or compiled by Ethiopians, Selassie made a TRANSLATION from Greek and Hebrew (original bible language) into Ethiopian dialect...NOT THAT ETHIOPIA FOUNDED CHRISTIANITY OR FIRST COMPILED THE BIBLE... THEY TRANSLATED, THEY DIDN'T COMPILE...


So are you telling me that the early prophets like Isaiah and King David waited for the Bible to be compiled by the Greek and Hebrew nations before they learned the spirituality and word of God ?

Again... good...

You said Romans 1:26 is what gives Ethiopia the right.. because it saved Christianity from the Romans and that Selassie is the saviour..
you are the one mincing words and providing circular arguments...



I didn't say Romans 1:21 gave Ethiopia the right or any right (Please refer to my previous post about quoting Rasta correctly, thanks); what I did was refer you to the book of ROMANs as you were referring to the ROMAN Catholics...Yes, I said Selassie I is the saviour and I repeat that without no apology! Lion of Judah is the Saviour, King of Kings is the Saviour. Qadamawe Haile Selassie I is the Saviour!!!

the link is there.. go and read the thread..

My dear I have history and Bible commentaries to back me up.. all you have is Rastafarian jargon and passive mentions of Ethiopia .


It's a bit strange that you state that all I have is jargons and passive mentions of Ethiopia. Thanks for your observation and what it means is that I should spare you my jargons and focus on others who have ears to hear. No hard feelings, I respect the fact that I cannot shave a man's head in his absence Peace

So how comes Psalm 87 did not mention Antioch and Rome etc as the Foundation of God and as the land where this man (JAH) was born? Or are you saying that Psalm 87 says JAH will be born in Ethiopia, and nevertheless some other regions of the world possess spiritual and religious texts that predate that Ethiopia where Psalm 87 says that God will manifest in flesh? Huh?


Psalm 87 talks about Jerusalem not Ethiopia.. Ethiopia was mentioned in passing.. God manifested in flesh in Bethlehem Judea not Ethiopia (read your bible)


In 21 years of discussing the Bible with hundreds (if not 1000s of people), you are the FIRST person who will categorically state that Psalm 87 refers to Israel. That makes you a genius and I commend your extremely unique talent
Just to confirm, are you saying Psalm 102:16 refers to Israel too, vis-a-vis Haile Selassie I and the setting up of OAU (Organisation of African Unity )?

And are you stating that Psalm 68:31 refers to Ethiopia in, erm, Israel?
Are you aware of Rev 2:9 at all?
What about Revelation 3:9, eh?

Peace

What proof are you still awaiting, the proof is there for you just open a Bible (with clean hands and a pure heart of course) flip the pages to Genesis Chatper 2 verse 13 and that is all the proof that you need. Adam and Eve were placed iin the Garden of Eden which had River Nile near it, a branch/Tributary of which runs through Ethiopia , end of story.


The only proof there is that a river runs through Ethiopia, BUT WHAT HAS THAT GOT TO DO WITH ANYTHING.. the rivers passes through three other places..
THIS DOESN'T PROVE ANYTHING.... ITS LAUGHABLE ACTUALLY

So sorry for telling you about a River that has got nothing to do with anything, I will refrain from mentioning rivers that pass through other places Peace


What that passage in Genesis tells us is that all civilisation was based on that origin, be it Social, Spiritual, Religious, Academic, I say ALL!!!
Unless you want to tell us that God made Adam and Eve in Ethiopia and then God left them without teachings/Texts/Canons etc


Lol.. so because river Gihon one of the four rivers passed through Ethiopia.. therefore it is the cradle of civilization... The river passes through other places.. are they also cradle of civilization??.. That logic is so poor that it is not worth mentioning.. Canaan was not mention, Jerusalem was not mentioned, Israel was not mentioned yet the bible records that God gave those places to his people and Jesus came from that nation..


Aplogies once again for mentioning inconsequential matters . Peace

Whatever religious/spiritual teachings the Ethiopians have, be it oral or written invariably predates whatever comes after!


Before Christianity came.. the Ethiopians were pagans..


Oh, really? so sorry I didn't notice despite reading the Bible for decades that Moses' Ethiopian wifey along with her kinsmen were pagans
But, I have taken on board your point that she was a pagan, being an Ethiopian, even though the Bible tells us differently.

So basically, until Jesus Christ came, everyone was pagan, innit? Jesus Christ!

It was nice reasoning with you. Pardon me once again for my lies, deceit and waste of your time. Try reading about Zadok the priest, King Solomon, Queen of Sheba and how their son Menelik I brought the Ark of the covenant from Israel to Ethiopia...(It's in the Book of Kings and Chronicles in the Bible) then, maybe, just maybe we may be able to resume a discussion on spirituality as I do not do religion, if u wish. Until then, this represents my final correspondence to you on these matters.
Look after yourself, mate

Peace

Tampinu:


I repeat, and for the final time. The mere fact that Ethiopia is the first country/Kingdom mentioned in the Bible means that Ethiopia is the root and fruit of Christianity. You do not have to agree and you are within your rights to disagree but I will not go back to that particular topic. And that, is that, about that!


He's right... He said one of the oldest not the oldest or that Ethiopia compiled the Bible first..

Amen! I completely agreed..


Again he is right... So before the Ethiopian Eunuch, there was no Christianity in Ethiopia... and he didn't even become a Christian in Ethiopia but in Jerusalem, where Christianity started and spread after Pentecost...

Where is Jerusalem? Oh, ok, I hear your reply....see my next question below....

Where is the NEW Jerusalem?

Beautiful.. wonderful...

So the bible was not written or compiled by Ethiopians, Selassie made a TRANSLATION from Greek and Hebrew (original bible language) into Ethiopian dialect...NOT THAT ETHIOPIA FOUNDED CHRISTIANITY OR FIRST COMPILED THE BIBLE... THEY TRANSLATED, THEY DIDN'T COMPILE...


So are you telling me that the early prophets like Isaiah and King David waited for the Bible to be compiled by the Greek and Hebrew nations before they learned the spirituality and word of God ?

Again... good...

You said Romans 1:26 is what gives Ethiopia the right.. because it saved Christianity from the Romans and that Selassie is the saviour..
you are the one mincing words and providing circular arguments...



I didn't say Romans 1:21 gave Ethiopia the right or any right (Please refer to my previous post about quoting Rasta correctly, thanks); what I did was refer you to the book of ROMANs as you were referring to the ROMAN Catholics...Yes, I said Selassie I is the saviour and I repeat that without no apology! Lion of Judah is the Saviour, King of Kings is the Saviour. Qadamawe Haile Selassie I is the Saviour!!!

the link is there.. go and read the thread..

My dear I have history and Bible commentaries to back me up.. all you have is Rastafarian jargon and passive mentions of Ethiopia .


It's a bit strange that you state that all I have is jargons and passive mentions of Ethiopia. Thanks for your observation and what it means is that I should spare you my jargons and focus on others who have ears to hear. No hard feelings, I respect the fact that I cannot shave a man's head in his absence Peace

So how comes Psalm 87 did not mention Antioch and Rome etc as the Foundation of God and as the land where this man (JAH) was born? Or are you saying that Psalm 87 says JAH will be born in Ethiopia, and nevertheless some other regions of the world possess spiritual and religious texts that predate that Ethiopia where Psalm 87 says that God will manifest in flesh? Huh?


Psalm 87 talks about Jerusalem not Ethiopia.. Ethiopia was mentioned in passing.. God manifested in flesh in Bethlehem Judea not Ethiopia (read your bible)


In 21 years of discussing the Bible with hundreds (if not 1000s of people), you are the FIRST person who will categorically state that Psalm 87 refers to Israel. That makes you a genius and I commend your extremely unique talent
Just to confirm, are you saying Psalm 102:16 refers to Israel too, vis-a-vis Haile Selassie I and the setting up of OAU (Organisation of African Unity )?

And are you stating that Psalm 68:31 refers to Ethiopia in, erm, Israel?
Are you aware of Rev 2:9 at all?
What about Revelation 3:9, eh?

Peace

What proof are you still awaiting, the proof is there for you just open a Bible (with clean hands and a pure heart of course) flip the pages to Genesis Chatper 2 verse 13 and that is all the proof that you need. Adam and Eve were placed iin the Garden of Eden which had River Nile near it, a branch/Tributary of which runs through Ethiopia , end of story.


The only proof there is that a river runs through Ethiopia, BUT WHAT HAS THAT GOT TO DO WITH ANYTHING.. the rivers passes through three other places..
THIS DOESN'T PROVE ANYTHING.... ITS LAUGHABLE ACTUALLY

So sorry for telling you about a River that has got nothing to do with anything, I will refrain from mentioning rivers that pass through other places Peace


What that passage in Genesis tells us is that all civilisation was based on that origin, be it Social, Spiritual, Religious, Academic, I say ALL!!!
Unless you want to tell us that God made Adam and Eve in Ethiopia and then God left them without teachings/Texts/Canons etc


Lol.. so because river Gihon one of the four rivers passed through Ethiopia.. therefore it is the cradle of civilization... The river passes through other places.. are they also cradle of civilization??.. That logic is so poor that it is not worth mentioning.. Canaan was not mention, Jerusalem was not mentioned, Israel was not mentioned yet the bible records that God gave those places to his people and Jesus came from that nation..


Aplogies once again for mentioning inconsequential matters . Peace

Whatever religious/spiritual teachings the Ethiopians have, be it oral or written invariably predates whatever comes after!


Before Christianity came.. the Ethiopians were pagans..


Oh, really? so sorry I didn't notice despite reading the Bible for decades that Moses' Ethiopian wifey along with her kinsmen were pagans
But, I have taken on board your point that she was a pagan, being an Ethiopian, even though the Bible tells us differently.

So basically, until Jesus Christ came, everyone was pagan, innit? Jesus Christ!

It was nice reasoning with you. Pardon me once again for my lies, deceit and waste of your time. Try reading about Zadok the priest, King Solomon, Queen of Sheba and how their son Menelik I brought the Ark of the covenant from Israel to Ethiopia...(It's in the Book of Kings and Chronicles in the Bible) then, maybe, just maybe we may be able to resume a discussion on spirituality as I do not do religion, if u wish. Until then, this represents my final correspondence to you on these matters.
Look after yourself, mate

Peace

http://www.sacred-texts.com/chr/kn/

53. How the Wagon was given to ETHIOPIA

http://www.sacred-texts.com/chr/kn/kn032.htm

Title Page
PREFACE TO THE PRESENT EDITION
PREFACE TO THE FIRST EDITION
CONTENTS.
LIST OF PLATES
INTRODUCTION
1. Concerning the Glory of Kings
2. Concerning the Greatness of Kings
3. Concerning the Kingdom of ADAM
4. Concerning Envy
5. Concerning the Kingdom of SETH
6. Concerning the Sin of CAIN
7. Concerning NOAH
8. Concerning the Flood
9. Concerning the Covenant of NOAH
10. Concerning ZION
11. The Unanimous Declaration of the Three Hundred and Eighteen Orthodox Fathers
12. Concerning CANAAN
13. Concerning ABRAHAM
14. Concerning the Covenant of ABRAHAM
15. Concerning ISAAC and JACOB
16. Concerning RÔBÊL (REUBEN)
17. Concerning the Glory of ZION
18. How the Orthodox Fathers and Bishops Agreed
19. How this Book came to be found
20. Concerning the Division of the Earth
21. Concerning the Queen of the South
22. Concerning TÂMRÎN, the Merchant
23. How the Merchant returned to ETHIOPIA
24. How the Queen made ready to set out on her Journey
25. How the Queen came to SOLOMON the King
26. How the King held converse with the Queen
27. Concerning the Labourer
28. How SOLOMON gave Commandments to the Queen
29. Concerning the Three Hundred and Eighteen [Patriarchs]
30. Concerning how King SOLOMON swore to the Queen
31. Concerning the sign which SOLOMON gave the Queen
32. How the Queen brought forth and came to her own Country
33. How the King of ETHIOPIA travelled
34. How the young man arrived in his mother's country
35. How King SOLOMON sent to his son the commander of his army
36. How King SOLOMON held intercourse with his son
37. How SOLOMON asked His Son Questions
38. How the King planned to send away his son with the children of the nobles
39. How they made the Son of SOLOMON King
40. How ZADOK the priest gave commands to DAVID the King
41. Concerning the blessing of Kings
42. Concerning the Ten Commandments
43. How the men of the Army of ISRAEL received [their] orders
44. How it is not a seemly thing to revile the King
45. How those who were sent away wept and made a plan
46. How they made a plan concerning ZION
47. Concerning the offering of AZÂRYÂS (AZARIAH) and the King
48. How they carried away ZION
49. How his Father blessed his Son
50. How they bade farewell to his Father and how the city mourned
51. How he said unto ZADOK the Priest, ''Go and bring the Covering (or, Clothing) which is upon it (i.e., ZION)''
52. How ZADOK the Priest Departed
53. How the Wagon was given to ETHIOPIA
54. How DAVID [the King of ETHIOPIA] Prophesied and Saluted ZION
55. How the People of ETHIOPIA Rejoiced
56. Of the Return of ZADOK the Priest, and the giving of the Gift
57. Concerning the Fall of ZADOK the Priest
58. How SOLOMON Rose up to Slay them
59. How the King Questioned an Egyptian, the Servant of PHARAOH
60. How SOLOMON Lamented for ZION
61. How SOLOMON Returned to JERUSALEM
62. Concerning the answer which SOLOMON made to them
63. How the Nobles of ISRAEL agreed [with the King]
64. How the Daughter of PHARAOH Seduced SOLOMON
65. Concerning the sin of SOLOMON
66. Concerning the prophecy of CHRIST
67. Concerning the lamentation of SOLOMON
68. Concerning MARY, Our Lady of Salvation
69. Concerning the Question of SOLOMON
70. How REHOBOAM reigned
71. Concerning MARY, the daughter of DAVID
72. Concerning the King of RÔMÊ (CONSTANTINOPLE)
73. Concerning the first judgment of ’ADRÂMÎ, King of RÔMÊ
74. Concerning the King of MEDYÂM
75. Concerning the King of BABYLON
76. Concerning lying witnesses
77. Concerning the King of PERSIA
78. Concerning the King of MOAB
79. Concerning the King of AMALEK
80. Concerning the King of the PHILISTINES
81. How the son of SAMSON slew the son of the King of the PHILISTINES
82. Concerning the going down of ABRAHAM into EGYPT
83. Concerning the King of the ISHMAELITES
84. Concerning the King of ETHIOPIA and how he returned to his country
85. Concerning the rejoicing of Queen MÂKĔDÂ
86. How Queen MÂKĔDÂ made her son King
87. How the nobles (or governors) of ETHIOPIA took the oath
88. How he himself related to his mother how they made him King
89. How the Queen talked to the Children of ISRAEL
90. How AZARIAH praised the Queen and her city
91. This is what ye shall eat: the clean and the unclean
92. How they renewed the kingdom of DAVID
93. How the Men of RÔMÊ destroyed the Faith
94. The first war of the King of ETHIOPIA
95. How the honourable estate of the King of ETHIOPIA was universally accepted
96. Concerning the Prophecy about CHRIST
97. Concerning the Murmuring of ISRAEL
98. Concerning the Rod of MOSES and the Rod of AARON
99. Concerning the Two Servants
100. Concerning the Angels who rebelled
101. Concerning Him that existeth in Everything and Everywhere
102. Concerning the Beginning
103. Concerning the Horns of the Altar
104. More concerning the Ark and the Talk of the Wicked
105. Concerning the belief of ABRAHAM
106. A Prophecy concerning the Coming of CHRIST
107. Concerning His entrance into JERUSALEM in Glory
108. Concerning the wickedness of the iniquitous JEWS
109. Concerning His Crucifixion
110. Concerning His Resurrection
111. Concerning His Ascension and His Second Coming
112. How the Prophets foreshadowed Him in their persons
113. Concerning the Chariot and the Vanquisher of the Enemy
114. Concerning the return of ZION
115. Concerning the Judgement of ISRAEL
116. Concerning the Chariot of ETHIOPIA
117. Concerning the King of RÔMÊ and the King of ETHIOPIA
Colophon

Tampinu:



So basically, until Jesus Christ came, everyone was pagan, innit? Jesus Christ! [/i]

It was nice reasoning with you. Pardon me once again for my lies, deceit and waste of your time. Try reading about Zadok the priest, King Solomon, Queen of Sheba and how their son Menelik I brought the Ark of the covenant from Israel to Ethiopia...( It's in the Book of Kings and Chronicles in the HOLY Bible ) then, maybe, just maybe we may be able to resume a discussion on spirituality as I do not do religion, if u wish. Until then, this represents my final correspondence to you on these matters.
Look after yourself, mate

Peace

It's called book of KINGS because it discusses the conducts of teh Kings of the Earth and can be understood better with reference to Psalm 2.

It's called book of CHRNICLES because it is a chronicle of the conducts of teh Kings of the earth...

Peace

Tampinu:



So basically, until Jesus Christ came, everyone was pagan, innit? Jesus Christ! [/i]

It was nice reasoning with you. Pardon me once again for my lies, deceit and waste of your time. Try reading about Zadok the priest, King Solomon, Queen of Sheba and how their son Menelik I brought the Ark of the covenant from Israel to Ethiopia...( It's in the Book of Kings and Chronicles in the HOLY Bible ) then, maybe, just maybe we may be able to resume a discussion on spirituality as I do not do religion, if u wish. Until then, this represents my final correspondence to you on these matters.
Look after yourself, mate

Peace

It's called book of KINGS because it discusses the conducts of the[b][/b] Kings of the Earth and can be understood better with reference to Psalm 2 .

It's called book of CHRONICLES because it is a chronicle of the conducts of the Kings of the earth...

Peace

truthislight:


I don't follow, What contradiction?

gen 1 and gen 2, gen 1 tells us how God created plants before men, gen 2 says when God created man there wasn't yet any plant

Ubenedictus:
gen 1 and gen 2, gen 1 tells us how God created plants before men, gen 2 says when God created man there wasn't yet any plant

Do you mean plant as in electricity generator?

Ubenedictus:
gen 1 and gen 2, gen 1 tells us how God created plants before men, gen 2 says when God created man there wasn't yet any plant

Can you please post the contradiction let us see?

I will not be the one to copy and paste your supposed contradiction.

Thank you.

Tampinu:

I repeat, and for the final time. The mere fact that Ethiopia is the first country/Kingdom mentioned in the Biblemeans that Ethiopia is the root and fruit of Christianity. You do not have to agree and you are within your rights to disagree but I will not go back to that particular topic. And that, is that, about that!

Again I disagree.. That is no criteria.. The root of Christianity is Israel according to God's promise to Abraham ( gen 12), Which comes from Jacob's lineage (12 tribes), Jacob being a son of Isaac who is the Son of Jacob...
Jesus wasn't born or died in Ethiopia but in Israel (Bethlehem and Jerusalem).. The bible is about the Israelites not the Ethiopians.. AND THATS THAT ABOUT THAT

Tampinu:

Where is Jerusalem? Oh, ok, I hear your reply....see my next question below....Where is the NEW Jerusalem?

The old Jerusalem is in Israel, The new Jerusalem will come down from heaven at the end
Rev 3: 12bthe name of the city of my God, which is new Jerusalem, which cometh down out of heaven from my God: Rev 21:2And I John saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down from God out of heaven,

Tampinu:

So are you telling me that the early prophets like Isaiah and King David waited for the Bible to be compiled by the Greek and Hebrew nations before they learned thespirituality and word of God?

No.. They had the Torah.. The Pentateuch.. And God spoke to them directly in the case of Isaiah and through the prophets and sometimes directly in the case of David... Can you show where God had that same relationship with the Ethiopians

Tampinu:

I didn't say Romans 1:21 gave Ethiopia the right or any right (Please refer to my previous post about quoting Rasta correctly, thanks); what I did was refer you to the book of ROMANs as you werereferring to the ROMAN Catholics...Yes, Isaid Selassie I is the saviour and I repeat that without no apology! Lion of Judah is the Saviour, King of Kings is the Saviour.QadamaweHaile Selassie I is the Saviour!!!

Good for you! My saviour is Jesus Christ the Nazarene, the Son of God made man.. The Messiah..
Luke 2:11For unto you is born this day in the city of David a saviour, which is Christ the Lord. John 4:42and know that this is indeed the Christ, the saviour of the world.

Tampinu:

It's a bit strange that you state that all I have is jargons and passive mentions ofEthiopia. Thanks for your observation and what it means is that I should spare you my jargons and focus on others who have ears to hear. No hard feelings, I respect the fact that I cannot shave a man's head in his absence Peace

No disrespect to you was meant.. I was only saying instead of using Rastafarian slangs and jargons . present historical and explicit biblical proof or even a biblical principle..

Tampinu:

In 21 years of discussing the Bible with hundreds (if not 1000s of people), you are the FIRST person who will categorically state that Psalm 87 refers to Israel. That makes you a genius and I commend your extremely unique talentJust to confirm, are you saying Psalm 102:16 refers to Israel too, vis-a-vis HaileSelassie I and the setting up of OAU (Organisation of AfricanUnity)?And are you stating that Psalm 68:31 refers to Ethiopia in, erm, Israel?Are you aware of Rev 2:9 at all?What about Revelation 3:9, eh?Peace

Funny enough for me as well.. You are the first person saying psalm 87 refers to Ethiopia..
You can look at Bible commentaries on that chapter most if not all refer to Jerusalem in that passage.. Take a look at this..
biblehub.com/commentaries/psalms/87-1.htm
Psalm 102 is talking about Jerusalem.. What has OAU got to do with Zion ?? and the LORD there been in all capital is referring to God the Father not haile Selassie.. lastly Am not aware of OAU having a religious significance it is a political organization .
Rev 2:9 and 3:9 can be understood properly in its historical and allegorical significance as it has to do with the Israelites who persecuted Christians in the 2nd century..

Tampinu:

Oh, really? so sorry I didn't notice despite reading the Bible for decades that Moses' Ethiopian wifey along with her kinsmen were pagansBut, I have taken on board your point that she was a pagan, being an Ethiopian, even though the Bible tells usdifferently.So basically, until Jesus Christ came, everyone was pagan, innit? Jesus Christ!It was nice reasoning with you. Pardon me once again for my lies, deceit and waste of your time. Try reading about Zadok the priest, King Solomon, Queen of Sheba and how their son Menelik I brought the Ark of the covenant from Israel to Ethiopia...(It's in the Book of Kings and Chronicles in the Bible) then, maybe, just maybe we may be able to resume a discussion on spirituality as I do not do religion, if u wish. Until then, this represents my final correspondenceto you on these matters.Look after yourself, matePeace

Sorry I fell into the fallacy of generalization.. There were some Ethiopians who partook in the Jewish religion so indeed not all were pagans..
And you're right Moses did mary an Ethiopian woman but that doesn't prove all Ethiopians were believers in the God of Moses.. Or that Ethiopia is the cradle of Christianity... Ahab married a foreigner also in Jezebel.. we all know that Jezebel was a pagan and she brought the worship of Baal to Israel with her..

AS FOR ZADOK HE WAS A JEW IN THE TRIBE OF LEVI AND NOT AN ETHIOPIAN...
1 chron 6:1The sons of Levi; Gershon, Kohath, and Merari. 2And the sons of Kohath; Amram, Izhar, and Hebron, and Uzziel. 3And the children of Amram; Aaron, and Moses, and Miriam. The sons also of Aaron; Nadab, and Abihu, Eleazar, and Ithamar. 4Eleazar begat Phinehas, Phinehas begat Abishua, 5and Abishua begat Bukki, and Bukki begat Uzzi, 6and Uzzi begat Zerahiah, and Zerahiah begat Meraioth, 7Meraioth begat Amariah, and Amariah begat ahitub, 8and ahitub begat Zadok, and Zadok begat Ahimaaz,

The queen of Sheba never became a Jew.. Or practiced Judaism.. She only came to see Solomon's wisdom for herself. Even if she did..it is her encounter with Solomon that made it happen..

as for Menelik.. There's nothing in the Bible about that.. If he indeed took the ark to Ethiopia.. It doesn't disprove the fact that the ark was given by God through Moses to the Israelites and it stayed in the temple in Jerusalem from when Solomon built the temple to when it was destroyed..

LASTLY.. before Jesus.. Every one was not a pagan.. The Jewish religion was the right way to God before Jesus Christ so if there were Ethiopians or indeed any other person who was faithful to the God of Israel.. Then that person was not a pagan.. But the fact remains that he was God of the Jews.. The Israelites..

Tampinu:


Ok, I see your replty.

So Psalms Chapter what did it say that God has Chosen Kent, England as His foundation as it did Ethiopia in Psalm 87?

as I have pointed out many times..Psalm 87 is talking about Jerusalem primarily not Ethiopian.. Secondly it doesn't mention any king's name whether Haile Selassie or King Henry...

Tampinu:

Because it appears you seem to fail to see the connect between the fact that Ethiopia is first country mentioned in the Bible
(Not along some ancient civilizations-as if they were all mentioned FIRST at the same time-I repeat Ethiopia is the first country mentioned in the Bible, FIRST means FIRST, FIRST does not mean along with some other ....)
That is a virtue called "Intellectual Honesty". The ability to say "Yes, you are right it is the first etc".
Not for somneone to say, "Yes, it's the first so?" That is evasive and childish. And with those who reason without depth I do not associate.

As a matter of fact Ethiopia was not mentioned as a "country" but as a land.. And it was the second Land mentioned.. The FIRST LAND MENTIONED WAS HAVILAH Not ETHIOPIA.. AND FOR THE MILLIONTH TIME.. THAT DOESN'T PROVE ANYTHING

Tampinu:

As if it is not logically consistent that if Psalm 87 says Ethiopia is God's country and Ethiopia is the First country mentioned in the Bible, how likely is the possibility that Ethiopia have the oldest version of the Christian Holy Books?

No its not logically consistent..
Can you show me verbatim where Psalm 87 calls Ethiopia "God's own Country" cause am not seeing it..
The bible in many places calls Israel "God's people and country

2 Samuel 7:23-24
"And what one nation on the earth is like
Your people Israel, whom God went to
redeem for Himself as a people and to
make a name for Himself, and to do a
great thing for You and awesome things
for Your land,
1 Kings 10:9
"Blessed be the LORD your God who
delighted in you to set you on the throne
of Israel; because the LORD loved Israel
forever, therefore He made you king, to
do justice and righteousness."
1 chron 17:21"And what one nation in the earth is like
Your people Israel, whom God went to
redeem for Himself as a people, to make
You a name by great and terrible things,
in driving out nations from before Your
people, whom You redeemed out of
Egypt?
Psalm 135:4
For the LORD has chosen Jacob for
Himself, Israel for His own possession.
Isaiah 41:8
"But you, Israel, My servant, Jacob whom
I have chosen, Descendant of Abraham
My friend,

Isaiah 44:21
"Remember these things, O Jacob, And
Israel, for you are My servant; I have
formed you, you are My servant, O Israel,
you will not be forgotten by Me.
Joel 3:1-2
"For behold, in those days and at that
time, When I restore the fortunes of
Judah and Jerusalem, I will gather all
the nations And bring them down to the
valley of Jehoshaphat Then I will enter
into judgment with them there On behalf
of My people and My inheritance, Israel,
Whom they have scattered among the
nations; And they have divided up My
land.
SO CLEARLY ISRAEL IS GOD'S COUNTRY.. BUT WOULD LIKE YOU to show me where God calls Ethiopia his own explicitly
Ethiopia does not have the oldest versions of the bible unless you factually prove otherwise. With dates and history...

Tampinu:

b] You have not pointed out anything Re: dismissing the fact the Ethiopia is the first country mentioned in the Bible. [/b]
First you came across as if it did not matter that Ethiopia was first country mentioned in the Bible, then you returned and made as if there was a cluster of countries named as FIRST in the Bible and Ethiopia just happened to be one of them. (Sigh)

Being named first doesn't directly translate to having the oldest version of the bible.. Besides the Land of Havilah was named first before the Land of ethiopia..

Tampinu:

Look, I have given my conclusive answer to all your questions on this matter by providing Haile Selassie's comments on the Bible; The King has spoken, it remains to see who will overturn the King's words. is it you? The king says WE IN ETHIOPIA HAVE ONE OF THE OLDEST VERSIONS OF THE BIBLE! (It's a humble, Noble and Polite way of saying WE HAVE THE OLDEST VERSION)

I agree with the emperor because Ethiopia being an old church can have ONE OF THE OLDEST VERSIONS OF THE BIBLE NOT THE OLDEST BECAUSE HISTORICALLY.. THE OLDEST BIBLE WOULD BE THE ONE FINALIZED AT THE COUNCIL OF CARTHAGE IN 397 AD

Tampinu:

What are you defending? You calling my King a liar? Not even the Pope or the Catholic church EVER raised a challenge to His Majesty's comments on the Bible as it is final. Then you expect me to be struggling to wake up one who is pretending to be sleeping. No man!.

NO SIR... Am not calling the Emperor a liar because I actually agree with what he said.. But disagree with what you're making him say...
The catholic church will not challenge anyone unless they fall into heresy. Ask King Henry the 8th

Tampinu:

Have a nice weekend and enjoy yourself. I rest my case.

If this is about winning arguments I agree that you have won and Rome is where Christianity began and Rome and Antioch have the oldest Bibleas well as the Canon.

Many Thanks

Thanks you too.. Its not about winning argument.. Its about what is historically and biblically accurate and true..

OLAADEGBU:

Are the stone tablet not part of the Pentateuch? Yes, the stone tablets and the rest of the Pentateuch was probably preserved in the Ark. Read Deuteronomy 10:5; 2 Kings 22:8; 2 Chronicles 34:14

The stone tablets are separate from book of the law.. Even though what is written in the stone tablet is found in the book of the Law...
The book of the law is a scroll not stone tablets..
Lastly according to the passages you stated the book of the law were not found inside the ark.. According to the bible anyone who directly touched or opened the ark would die as in the case of Uzzah (2 Sam 6) and the Philistines and the Ekrons (1 Sam 5 and 6).

OLAADEGBU:

And you want me to rely on the Septuagint translation of the apocryphal which was done in the 5th century?

The translation was done I. The 3rd century BCE not the 5th century..If its good for Jesus and the apostles its good for me..

OLAADEGBU:

Jesus scanned through the whole of the 39 books of the OT including the ones mentioned up there. See Luke 11:51; 24:44

Those verses don't say that.. Luke 11 talks about how the Israelites killed the Prophets.. Jesus didn't need to glances through the entire old testament to know that.. He is God.. He knows all things.. Besides that verse doesn't mention anything about reading or glancing through scripture.. As for luke 24.. The same principle applies Jesus doesn't need to glance through scripture to be able to explain. The fulfilment to them.. He is God, he knows everything.. And last luke 24 only talks about the law, the prophets and psalms.. He doesn't mention esther, so why do you accept Esther..

OLAADEGBU:

Didn't you say that Jesus and His apostles quoted from it? You are yet to show me where.

They made allusions to it.. Allusions are different from verbatim quotes.. Don't run away from me question.. Show me where it says Jesus must quote a book for me it to be called scripture..

OLAADEGBU:

Was it referenced from any of the apocryphal books?

It was referenced from a book called the assumption of Moses.. The point still remains that it was quoted in the bible according to your rule.. But it is not part of the old testament

OLAADEGBU:

The book of Revelation is what was divinely received from God. The apocrypha even by its own admission was written in a period when God was silent for 400 years. The book of Enoch you always use as an example is not apocrypha neither is it canonical but parts of it contains certain amounts of divine truths as revealed in the passage you quoted above.

I quoted Tobit not Enoch..if Enoch contains divine truths then why is it not in your 66 book bible??
And p.s. I don't always use the book of Enoch

easymancfc:

Again I disagree.. That is no criteria.. The root of Christianity is Israel according to God's promise to Abraham ( gen 12), Which comes from Jacob's lineage (12 tribes), Jacob being a son of Isaac who is the Son of Jacob...
Jesus wasn't born or died in Ethiopia but in Israel (Bethlehem and Jerusalem).. The bible is about the Israelites not the Ethiopians.. AND THATS THAT ABOUT THAT

The old Jerusalem is in Israel, The new Jerusalem will come down from heaven at the end
Rev 3: 12bthe name of the city of my God, which is new Jerusalem, which cometh down out of heaven from my God: Rev 21:2And I John saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down from God out of heaven,

No.. They had the Torah.. The Pentateuch.. And God spoke to them directly in the case of Isaiah and through the prophets and sometimes directly in the case of David... Can you show where God had that same relationship with the Ethiopians

Good for you! My saviour is Jesus Christ the Nazarene, the Son of God made man.. The Messiah..
Luke 2:11For unto you is born this day in the city of David a saviour, which is Christ the Lord. John 4:42and know that this is indeed the Christ, the saviour of the world.

No disrespect to you was meant.. I was only saying instead of using Rastafarian slangs and jargons . present historical and explicit biblical proof or even a biblical principle..


Funny enough for me as well.. You are the first person saying psalm 87 refers to Ethiopia..
You can look at Bible commentaries on that chapter most if not all refer to Jerusalem in that passage.. Take a look at this..
biblehub.com/commentaries/psalms/87-1.htm
Psalm 102 is talking about Jerusalem.. What has OAU got to do with Zion ?? and the LORD there been in all capital is referring to God the Father not haile Selassie.. lastly Am not aware of OAU having a religious significance it is a political organization .
Rev 2:9 and 3:9 can be understood properly in its historical and allegorical significance as it has to do with the Israelites who persecuted Christians in the 2nd century..

Sorry I fell into the fallacy of generalization.. There were some Ethiopians who partook in the Jewish religion so indeed not all were pagans..
And you're right Moses did mary an Ethiopian woman but that doesn't prove all Ethiopians were believers in the God of Moses.. Or that Ethiopia is the cradle of Christianity... Ahab married a foreigner also in Jezebel.. we all know that Jezebel was a pagan and she brought the worship of Baal to Israel with her..

AS FOR ZADOK HE WAS A JEW IN THE TRIBE OF LEVI AND NOT AN ETHIOPIAN...
1 chron 6:1The sons of Levi; Gershon, Kohath, and Merari. 2And the sons of Kohath; Amram, Izhar, and Hebron, and Uzziel. 3And the children of Amram; Aaron, and Moses, and Miriam. The sons also of Aaron; Nadab, and Abihu, Eleazar, and Ithamar. 4Eleazar begat Phinehas, Phinehas begat Abishua, 5and Abishua begat Bukki, and Bukki begat Uzzi, 6and Uzzi begat Zerahiah, and Zerahiah begat Meraioth, 7Meraioth begat Amariah, and Amariah begat ahitub, 8and ahitub begat Zadok, and Zadok begat Ahimaaz,

The queen of Sheba never became a Jew.. Or practiced Judaism.. She only came to see Solomon's wisdom for herself. Even if she did..it is her encounter with Solomon that made it happen..

as for Menelik.. There's nothing in the Bible about that.. If he indeed took the ark to Ethiopia.. It doesn't disprove the fact that the ark was given by God through Moses to the Israelites and it stayed in the temple in Jerusalem from when Solomon built the temple to when it was destroyed..

LASTLY.. before Jesus.. Every one was not a pagan.. The Jewish religion was the right way to God before Jesus Christ so if there were Ethiopians or indeed any other person who was faithful to the God of Israel.. Then that person was not a pagan.. But the fact remains that he was God of the Jews.. The Israelites..

OK, I get your point no worries.
Takecare

JAH Bless

easymancfc:


The stone tablets are separate from book of the law.. Even though what is written in the stone tablet is found in the book of the Law...
The book of the law is a scroll not stone tablets..
Lastly according to the passages you stated the book of the law were not found inside the ark.. According to the bible anyone who directly touched or opened the ark would die as in the case of Uzzah (2 Sam 6) and the Philistines and the Ekrons (1 Sam 5 and 6).

Moses wrote the first 5 books of the Bible. It only makes sense that he preserved those same books called the Penteteuch in the Ark, if not where do you think he will keep them in the wilderness?

easymancfc:


The translation was done I. The 3rd century BCE not the 5th century..If its good for Jesus and the apostles its good for me..

Let's leave that for the jury.

easymancfc:


Those verses don't say that.. Luke 11 talks about how the Israelites killed the Prophets.. Jesus didn't need to glances through the entire old testament to know that.. He is God.. He knows all things.. Besides that verse doesn't mention anything about reading or glancing through scripture.. As for luke 24.. The same principle applies Jesus doesn't need to glance through scripture to be able to explain. The fulfilment to them.. He is God, he knows everything.. And last luke 24 only talks about the law, the prophets and psalms.. He doesn't mention esther, so why do you accept Esther..

"And He said unto them, These are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets and in the psalms concerning Me" (Luke 24:44).

Jesus mention of the threefold division of the Scripture actually compassed the entire OT canon. Another way of expressing this would be the historical, poetical and the prophetic writings, all of which are divinely inspired and inerrant unlike the apocryphal writings.

easymancfc:


They made allusions to it.. Allusions are different from verbatim quotes.. Don't run away from me question.. Show me where it says Jesus must quote a book for me it to be called scripture..

But you said they quoted from it, didn't you? There is no where in the apocrypha where it says thus says the Lord neither did Jesus acknowledge its existence.

easymancfc:


It was referenced from a book called the assumption of Moses.. The point still remains that it was quoted in the bible according to your rule.. But it is not part of the old testament

The assumption of Moses in not God breathed. Simples.

easymancfc:


I quoted Tobit not Enoch..if Enoch contains divine truths then why is it not in your 66 book bible??
And p.s. I don't always use the book of Enoch

The book of Tobith contains heresies and therefore cannot be part of the canon.

OLAADEGBU:


Moses wrote the first 5 books of the Bible. It only makes sense that he preserved those same books called the Penteteuch in the Ark, if not where do you think he will keep them in the wilderness?



Let's leave that for the jury.



"And He said unto them, These are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets and in the psalms concerning Me" (Luke 24:44).

Jesus mention of the threefold division of the Scripture actually compassed the entire OT canon. Another way of expressing this would be the historical, poetical and the prophetic writings, all of which are divinely inspired and inerrant unlike the apocryphal writings.



But you said they quoted from it, didn't you? There is no where in the apocrypha where it says thus says the Lord neither did Jesus acknowledge its existence.



The assumption of Moses in not God breathed. Simples.



The book of Tobith contains heresies and therefore cannot be part of the canon.

How can you talk about the Divine if you know not God?

How can you speak about Jesus if you are not sure of Immanuel?

How can you mention Enoch if you know not the Holy man?

Rasta is sitting here and watching all your games.....Rasta will patiently wait here and watch you all return to the start , where it all began, ((((Ethiopia))))

https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=Enoch+Ethiopian&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&client=ubuntu&channel=fs&gfe_rd=cr&dcr=0&ei=5QXUWdj5JqvVXpSwg7AH&gws_rd=ssl

Peace

Tampinu:


How can you talk about the Divine if you know not God?

How can you speak about Jesus if you are not sure of Immanuel?

How can you mention Enoch if you know not the Holy man?

Rasta is sitting here and watching all your games.....Rasta will watch you all return to the start , where it all began, ((((Ethiopia))))

Peace

Metatron
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Not to be confused with Megatron, Magnetron, or Mettaton.
For other uses, see Metatron (disambiguation).

Metatron (Hebrew מטטרון; prob. derived from the Latin mētātor: "one who metes out or marks off a place, a divider and fixer of boundaries", "a measurer",[1] although several other suggestions exist[2]) or Mattatron[3] is an archangel in Judaism and known in Judaism as the Recording Angel or the Chancellor of Heaven (which makes Adramelech his infernal counterpart).[4][5][6] The name Metatron is not mentioned in the Hebrew Bible, nor is it mentioned in the early Enoch literature. How the name originated is a matter of debate. Although Metatron is mentioned in a few brief passages in the Talmud, he appears primarily in mystical Kabbalistic texts within the Rabbinic literature. In that tradition, he is the highest of the angels and serves as the celestial scribe or "recording angel".[7]

According to Jewish apocrypha, Metatron is the name Enoch received, after his transformation into an angel.[8] The book of Genesis (5:24) is often cited as evidence of Enoch's bodily ascension into heaven: "And Enoch walked with God: and he was not; for God took him."[9]


https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=Enoch+Ethiopian&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&client=ubuntu&channel=fs&gfe_rd=cr&dcr=0&ei=5QXUWdj5JqvVXpSwg7AH&gws_rd=ssl

Tampinu:


OK, I get your point no worries.
Takecare

JAH Bless

JAH BLESS YOU TOO.. TAKE CARE AS WELL

OLAADEGBU:

Moses wrote the first 5 books of the Bible. It only makes sense that he preserved those same books called the Penteteuch in the Ark, if not where do you think he will keep them in the wilderness?

He will keep them somewhere else.. The bible tells us what was inside the Ark and it does mention the Torah being in the ark, If it was then the writer of Hebrews would have mentioned it outrightly.. The two stone tablets are different from the Torah and both are very familiar to the Jews.. The book of Hebrews was written 100s of years after so it should have an accurate account of what was in the ark, besides the fact that it is the inspired word of God and we know that God cannot lie.. And also the fact that it was written to the Hebrews who the ark was made for..
SO I WILL GO WITH THE BIBLE ON THIS ONE... EVEN IF I ACCEPT THAT THE FIVE BOOKS OF MOSES WERE CONTAINED IN THE ARK.. WHICH I DONT.. THAT DOESN'T INCLUDE THE REMAINING 34 BOOKS... and like I have pointed out.. The Jews could not open or close the ark at will because anyone who touches or opens the ark was killed even Uzzah who was a priest.
Your point doesn't add up..
I go with the writer of Hebrew
Hebrew 9:4bthe ark of the covenant covered on all sides with gold, which contained a golden urn holding the manna, and Aaron’s rod that budded, and the tables of the covenant;

OLAADEGBU:

Let's leave that for the jury.

No.. History is clear.. No need for a jury when history is clear..
https://www.britannica.com/topic/Septuagint
Analysis of the language has established that the Torah , or Pentateuch (the first five books of the Old Testament), was translated near the middle of the 3rd century BCE and that the rest of the Old Testament was translated in the 2nd century BCE.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Septuagint
The title ( Greek : Ἡ μετάφρασις τῶν
Ἑβδομήκοντα, lit. "The Translation of the
Seventy" and its Roman numeral LXX refer to
the legendary seventy Jewish scholars who
solely translated the Five Books of Moses into
Koine Greek as early as the 3rd century
BCE.

In case you don't know what BCE is... It means BEFORE CHRIST OR BEFORE COMMON ERA..
So the Septuagint was transplanted 300 years before Christ not in the fifth century..

OLAADEGBU:

"And He said unto them, These are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets and in the psalms concerning Me" (Luke 24:44).

Jesus mention of the threefold division of the Scripture actually compassed the entire OT canon. Another way of expressing this would be the historical, poetical and the prophetic writings, all of which are divinely inspired and inerrant unlike the apocryphal writings.

Jesus didn't need to read the 39 book old testament to make that statement.. He is God, He is omniscient, He inspired scriptures so he doesn't need to scan through that... And most importantly That verse doesn't say any thing about Jesus "scanning" through anything..
Lastly What did the Book of Esther say about Jesus?? Am curious,

OLAADEGBU:

But you said they quoted from it, didn't you? There is no where in the apocrypha where it says thus says the Lord neither did Jesus acknowledge its existence.

Now you are lieing planely.. This was my comment "They made allusions to it.. Allusions are different from verbatim quotes.."
Allusions is what I said not verbatim quotes
Allusion means An indirect reference; a hint; a reference to something supposed to be known, but not explicitly mentioned; a covert indication.

You are avoiding the question I am asking you...
WHERE IN THE BIBLE DOES IT SAY OR WHO MADE THE LAW THAT A BOOK MUST BE QUOTED WITH "THUS SAYS THE LORD FOR IT TO BE CONSIDERED SCRIPTURE?
Answer the question directly and stop avoiding it..

OLAADEGBU:

The assumption of Moses in not God breathed. Simples.

I never said it was.. But why was it quoted by Jude?? It clearly contains a divine revelation which no other 39 book old testament book contains.. And that revelation was quoted in the Word of God which is infallible making the revelation infallible..

OLAADEGBU:

The book of Tobith contains heresies and therefore cannot be part of the canon.

Please tell me the Heresy? Who made it a heresy? And why it is a heresy?

easymancfc:


He will keep them somewhere else.. The bible tells us what was inside the Ark and it does mention the Torah being in the ark, If it was then the writer of Hebrews would have mentioned it outrightly.. The two stone tablets are different from the Torah and both are very familiar to the Jews.. The book of Hebrews was written 100s of years after so it should have an accurate account of what was in the ark, besides the fact that it is the inspired word of God and we know that God cannot lie.. And also the fact that it was written to the Hebrews who the ark was made for..
SO I WILL GO WITH THE BIBLE ON THIS ONE... EVEN IF I ACCEPT THAT THE FIVE BOOKS OF MOSES WERE CONTAINED IN THE ARK.. WHICH I DONT.. THAT DOESN'T INCLUDE THE REMAINING 34 BOOKS... and like I have pointed out.. The Jews could not open or close the ark at will because anyone who touches or opens the ark was killed even Uzzah who was a priest.
Your point doesn't add up..
I go with the writer of Hebrew
Hebrew 9:4bthe ark of the covenant covered on all sides with gold, which contained a golden urn holding the manna, and Aaron’s rod that budded, and the tables of the covenant;

My point is that the Torah was recognised as God-breathed and preserved. We can open another thread and discuss how this was preserved.

easymancfc:


No.. History is clear.. No need for a jury when history is clear..
https://www.britannica.com/topic/Septuagint
Analysis of the language has established that the Torah , or Pentateuch (the first five books of the Old Testament), was translated near the middle of the 3rd century BCE and that the rest of the Old Testament was translated in the 2nd century BCE.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Septuagint
The title ( Greek : Ἡ μετάφρασις τῶν
Ἑβδομήκοντα, lit. "The Translation of the
Seventy" and its Roman numeral LXX refer to
the legendary seventy Jewish scholars who
solely translated the Five Books of Moses into
Koine Greek as early as the 3rd century
BCE.

In case you don't know what BCE is... It means BEFORE CHRIST OR BEFORE COMMON ERA..
So the Septuagint was transplanted 300 years before Christ not in the fifth century..

I said that the OT had been translated into Greek during the 3rd century B.C., which is known as the Septuagint. It was this Greek Septuagint that Jesus' disciples frequently used. The Apocrypha is what I said was stealthily placed at the end of this Septuagint and it was dated in the 5th century, this is one of the reasons we cannot rely on it to tell us what was common half a millennium earlier. The fact that neither Jesus nor any of His apostles quoted from the apocrypha should tell us that it was not included in the earlier version of the Septuagint. Josephus was familiar with the Septuagint and he made use of it but did not consider it to be part of the Scriptures.

easymancfc:


Jesus didn't need to read the 39 book old testament to make that statement.. He is God, He is omniscient, He inspired scriptures so he doesn't need to scan through that... And most importantly That verse doesn't say any thing about Jesus "scanning" through anything..
Lastly What did the Book of Esther say about Jesus?? Am curious,

What Jesus said in Luke 24:44 was basically a 3 fold division that embraces the entire OT canon. You will need eyesalve to see it.

easymancfc:


Now you are lieing planely.. This was my comment "They made allusions to it.. Allusions are different from verbatim quotes.."
Allusions is what I said not verbatim quotes
Allusion means An indirect reference; a hint; a reference to something supposed to be known, but not explicitly mentioned; a covert indication.

You are avoiding the question I am asking you...
WHERE IN THE BIBLE DOES IT SAY OR WHO MADE THE LAW THAT A BOOK MUST BE QUOTED WITH "THUS SAYS THE LORD FOR IT TO BE CONSIDERED SCRIPTURE?
Answer the question directly and stop avoiding it..

I assumed you said so and if you did not, I apologise. Is it not written in one of your apocrypha books that God did not speak to the prophets in those days?

easymancfc:


I never said it was.. But why was it quoted by Jude?? It clearly contains a divine revelation which no other 39 book old testament book contains.. And that revelation was quoted in the Word of God which is infallible making the revelation infallible..

The fact that a book contains some truths doesn't make the whole book God-breathed, the moment some lies are added then the book becomes corrupted.

easymancfc:


Please tell me the Heresy? Who made it a heresy? And why it is a heresy?

See the link in the OP to discover the heresy embedded therein.

easymancfc:


and P.S THERE ARE QUOTES FROM JESUS AND THE APOSTLES THAT ARE VERBATUM QUOTES OR VERY SIMILAR WRITINGS FROM THE APOCRYPHA..

Is this not what you said or wrote? Do you want to come back and deny you said the quote above?

OLAADEGBU:


My point is that the Torah was recognised as God-breathed and preserved. We can open another thread and discuss how this was preserved.

The point is there was no 39 book old testament in the Ark...

OLAADEGBU:

I said that the OT had been translated into Greek during the 3rd century B.C., which is known as the Septuagint. It was this Greek Septuagint that Jesus' disciples frequently used. The Apocrypha is what I said was stealthily placed at the end of this Septuagint and it was dated in the 5th century, this is one of the reasons we cannot rely on it to tell us what was common half a millennium earlier. The fact that neither Jesus nor any of His apostles quoted from the apocrypha should tell us that it was not included in the earlier version of the Septuagint. Josephus was familiar with the Septuagint and he made use of it but did not consider it to be part of the Scriptures.

Jesus and the apostles made allusions to the Deuterocanon in their writings and teacchings as something that was common knowledge... Something that would not be possible except everyone was familiar with it...

Secondly can you prove with history that the deutorocanon was dated to the 5th century.. And please clarify is 5th century BCE OR AD/CE

OLAADEGBU:

What Jesus said in Luke 24:44 was basically a 3 fold division that embraces the entire OT canon. You will need eyesalve to see it.

That's what you read to that verse not what it actually says...

Again I ask.. What does the book of Esther have to say about Jesus...

OLAADEGBU:

I assumed you said so and if you did not, I apologise. Is it not written in one of your apocrypha books that God did not speak to the prophets in those days?

You're avoiding the question again...
WHERE DOES IT SAY IN THE BIBLE THAT JESUS HAS TO QUOTE A PASSAGE OR SAY THUS SAYS THE LORD IN IT FOR IT TO BE SCRIPTURE..

OLAADEGBU:

The fact that a book contains some truths doesn't make the whole book God-breathed, the moment some lies are added then the book becomes corrupted.

1. The point is that it contains a truth that no other scripture contains which you have admitted to by your comments above which is not contained in any other 39 book OT Book...and it was quoted by an apostle in the bible...
2. Can you tell me the errors it contains

OLAADEGBU:

See the link in the OP to discover the heresy embedded therein.

[/quote]
you said it... Answer the question directly... tell me the heresy, who made it a heresy and why it is a heresy

OLAADEGBU:


Is this not what you said or wrote? Do you want to come back and deny you said the quote above?

Here is the fundamental question...Where in the Bible does it say that Jesus or the apostles have to quote a book for it to be called scripture or inspired

easymancfc:


The point is there was no 39 book old testament in the Ark...

The bottomline is that the 39 books of the OT was not discovered and preserved by the Roman Catholic church.

easymancfc:


Jesus and the apostles made allusions to the Deuterocanon in their writings and teacchings as something that was common knowledge... Something that would not be possible except everyone was familiar with it...

A church father called Jerome confirmed that the apocrypha was not part of the inspired Scriptures why would Jesus or his apostles give credit to it?

easymancfc:


Secondly can you prove with history that the deutorocanon was dated to the 5th century.. And please clarify is 5th century BCE OR AD/CE

It was the apocrypha that was placed at the end of the copies of the Septuagint that was dated in the 5th century A.D, don't ask me how.

easymancfc:


That's what you read to that verse not what it actually says...

Again I ask.. What does the book of Esther have to say about Jesus...

Jesus referenced the OT from Genesis to the last book in the Jewish Scriptures, don't tell me you don't know what referencing means. You cannot deny the providential care and leading of God in the book of Esther. God's Providence is part of the criteria to be included in the canon.

easymancfc:


You're avoiding the question again...
WHERE DOES IT SAY IN THE BIBLE THAT JESUS HAS TO QUOTE A PASSAGE OR SAY THUS SAYS THE LORD IN IT FOR IT TO BE SCRIPTURE..

It is just one of the criteria to make it into the canon.

easymancfc:


1. The point is that it contains a truth that no other scripture contains which you have admitted to by your comments above which is not contained in any other 39 book OT Book...and it was quoted by an apostle in the bible...

2. Can you tell me the errors it contains

you said it... Answer the question directly... tell me the heresy, who made it a heresy and why it is a heresy

See the excerpts from gotquestions.org

Many have highlighted a few historical and theological errors in Tobit.

First, Tobit 1:15 incorrectly notes that Sennacherib was Shalmaneser's son, rather than the son of Sargon II.

Also, Tobit seems to imply that he was alive during the reign of Jeroboam I (about 930 B.C.), but at his death he was reported to be 117 years old.

Theologically, Tobit asserts that almsgiving alone "will save you from death," not, as Paul states in Galatians 2:15, that man is justified (saved) "by faith in Christ and not by observing the law, because by observing the law no one will be justified."

And Jesus, in John 3:16, says that "whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life." Faith alone, therefore, not works or observing the Law, provides salvation. From gotquestions.org

The book of Judith contains wrong historical facts:

Judith 1:5, "Now in the twelfth year of his reign, Nabuchodonosor, king of the Assyrians, who reigned in Ninive the great city, fought against Arphaxad and overcame him." from the OP.

easymancfc:


Here is the fundamental question...Where in the Bible does it say that Jesus or the apostles have to quote a book for it to be called scripture or inspired

You need to cover your face in shame as you cannot admit that you truly said what you denied earlier, despite the fact that I pointed it out to you. You said: "THERE ARE QUOTES FROM JESUS AND THE APOSTLES THAT ARE VERBATUM QUOTES..." and yet you have the effrontery to accuse my of lying? What a shame.

OLAADEGBU:


The bottomline is that the 39 books of the OT was not discovered and preserved by the Roman Catholic church.

Now you are arguing with yourself again.. I never told you that the catholic church discovered or preserved the old testament.. I said the Catholic church adopted the Septuagint which contained the deuterocanon...
SO THE POINT IS THAT YOU ARE WRONG AND THAT THE 39 BOOK OLD TESTAMENT WAS NEVER PRESERVED IN THE ARK..

OLAADEGBU:

A church father called Jerome confirmed that the apocrypha was not part of the inspired Scriptures why would Jesus or his apostles give credit to it?

1. Jerome is one Church father and he was wrong if he made that statement.. He showed his personal opinion based on what the Followers of Judaism accepted.. What he said was that the Jews who were enemies of the Christians did not accept them.. Not that they were not taken to be scriptures by christians.. Before The council of Nicea where the doctrine of the Trinity was defined there were some Church father's who denied the Trinity.. I am sure You won't accept their statements because you believe in the Trinity now
2. There are many other church fathers and councils who quote them as scriptire e.g. St. Polycarp of Smyrna, St. Irenaeus of Lyons, St. Hippolytus, St. Cyprian of Carthage, St. Damasus , St. Augustine..
3. Lastly Jerome later did accept them as scripture.. And defended them in his work (Against Rufinus 11:33 [A.D. 402]).

OLAADEGBU:

It was the apocrypha that was placed at the end of the copies of the Septuagint that was dated in the 5th century A.D, don't ask me how.

You are wrong.... The deuterocanon was not placed at the end Septuagint in the 5th century A.D. It has been part of the Septuagint long before then..
Your history is wrong..
1. The Bible was compiled in the 4th century with the Septuagint (council of Rome, Hippo and Carthage, A.D. 382, 393 and 397 respectively all in the 4th century.. and the Council using the Septuagint which contained the deuterocanon..
2. The codex Vaticanus and codex Sinaiticus are "bibles" that existed before the fifth century and both contain the deuterocanon...

OLAADEGBU:

Jesus referenced the OT from Genesis to the last book in the Jewish Scriptures, don't tell me you don't know what referencing means. You cannot deny the providential care and leading of God in the book of Esther. God's Providence is part of the criteria to be included in the canon.

I see you have shifted your standard from "Thus says the Lord" or "it is written" to "reference".. Well Jesus didn't reference esther or Songs of song or many others in the New testament.. If you say he did then Show me...

Lastly God's providence was also show in Tobit and Assumption of Moses.. Why are they not in your bible..
AND PLEASE WHERE IN THE BIBLE DOES IT SAY THAT GOD'S PROVIDENCE IS A CRITERIA FOR CANONICITY...

OLAADEGBU:

It is just one of the criteria to make it into the canon.

SAYS WHO? IN WHICH VERSE OF THE BIBLE?? AT WHICH CHURCH COUNCIL? IN WHICH DOCUMENT

OLAADEGBU:

See the excerpts from gotquestions.org

GOT QUESTIONS IS NOT THE AUTHORITY ON THE CANON OR THE BIBLE CANON..

OLAADEGBU:

The book of Judith contains wrong historical facts:

the book of Judith or Tobit for that matter is not meant to be taken as a historical document.. This fact was clear even to the people of the times it was written
...

in the case of Tobit, you can't compare old testament (before Jesus) to Pauline theology or Even the teaching of Jesus... In the old testament.. The command was to obey the law as a believer which Tobit emphasizes almsgiving with righteousness..(see tobit 12: which is not unlike what you would find in the old testament.. He talked about prayer with fasting also.. And avoiding sin.. HE DEFINITELY DID NOT MEAN GIVING ALMS ALONE..
besides JESUS and some of the apostles. Made such statements
Jesus
Luke 11:41 But give for alms those things which are within; and behold, everything is clean for you.
Luke 12:33Sell what you possess and give alms. Make to
yourselves bags which grow not old, a treasure in
heaven which faileth not: where no thief
approacheth, nor moth corrupteth.

Apostles
1 peter 4:8 Above all hold unfailing your love for one another, since love covers a multitude of sins. 9 Practice hospitality ungrudgingly to one another

Heb 13:16 Do not neglect to do good and to share what you have, for such sacrifices are pleasing to God.

OLAADEGBU:


You need to cover your face in shame as you cannot admit that you truly said what you denied earlier, despite the fact that I pointed it out to you. You said: "THERE ARE QUOTES FROM JESUS AND THE APOSTLES THAT ARE VERBATUM QUOTES..." and yet you have the effrontery to accuse my of lying? What a shame.

Hide my face in shame.. LOL..You're a funny person.. You are just hanging on to straws after your argument fails.. Whether or not Jesus or the apostles quoted from the deuterocanon will only be important if it is a reason for Belonging to the the O.T canon.. Which it is not...
NO WERE DOES IT STATE, IN THE BIBLE OR OTHERWISE THAT JESUS OR HIS APOSTLES MUST QUOTE A BOOK FOR IT TO BE SCRIPTURE...
that is a presumption you hold that is wrong.. Because..
1. I have shown you books that were quoted by Jude (1:9) as in the case of the Assumption of Moses and Hebrews (11:37) was taken directly from the Ascension of Isaiah.. If according to you.. QUOTATION EQUALS CANONICITY then these two books should be part of your old testament...
2. I have also showed you that many other old testament books are not quoted or even alluded to by Jesus or the apostles....If according to you.. QUOTATION EQUALS CANONICITY then these books should not be part of your old testament... Song of Songs, Ecclesiastes, Esther, Obadiah, Zephaniah, Judges, 1 Chronicles, Ezra, Nehemiah, Lamentations and Nahum. Not one of these Old Testament books is ever quoted or alluded to by Christ or the Apostles in the New Testament.

so I am not accusing you of anything I am only pointing out the inconsistencies in your argument.. If you think that means you're lying then that's your problem

easymancfc:


Hide my face in shame.. LOL..You're a funny person.. You are just hanging on to straws after your argument fails.. Whether or not Jesus or the apostles quoted from the deuterocanon will only be important if it is a reason for Belonging to the the O.T canon.. Which it is not...
NO WERE DOES IT STATE, IN THE BIBLE OR OTHERWISE THAT JESUS OR HIS APOSTLES MUST QUOTE A BOOK FOR IT TO BE SCRIPTURE...
that is a presumption you hold that is wrong.. Because..
1. I have shown you books that were quoted by Jude (1:9) as in the case of the Assumption of Moses and Hebrews (11:37) was taken directly from the Ascension of Isaiah.. If according to you.. QUOTATION EQUALS CANONICITY then these two books should be part of your old testament...
2. I have also showed you that many other old testament books are not quoted or even alluded to by Jesus or the apostles....If according to you.. QUOTATION EQUALS CANONICITY then these books should not be part of your old testament... Song of Songs, Ecclesiastes, Esther, Obadiah, Zephaniah, Judges, 1 Chronicles, Ezra, Nehemiah, Lamentations and Nahum. Not one of these Old Testament books is ever quoted or alluded to by Christ or the Apostles in the New Testament.

so I am not accusing you of anything I am only pointing out the inconsistencies in your argument.. If you think that means you're lying then that's your problem

Not many know what Jesus looks like...See 1 Maccabees 3:48 and ask yourself if that is the type of information that they would like to openly display in the normal Bible Canon...

Read Maccabees 3:48 and see the images below...

Tampinu:


Ecclesiasticus (Sirach) 1
1. All wisdom cometh from the Lord, and is with him for ever.
2. Who can number the sand of the sea, and the drops of rain, and the days of eternity?
3. Who can find out the height of heaven, and the breadth of the earth, and the deep, and wisdom?
4. Wisdom hath been created before all things, and the understanding of prudence from everlasting.
5. The word of God most high is the fountain of wisdom; and her ways are everlasting commandments.
6. To whom hath the root of wisdom been revealed? or who hath known her wise counsels?
7. [Unto whom hath the knowledge of wisdom been made manifest? and who hath understood her great experience?]
8. There is one wise and greatly to be feared, the Lord sitting upon his throne.
9. He created her, and saw her, and numbered her, and poured her out upon all his works.
10. She is with all flesh according to his gift, and he hath given her to them that love him.
11. The fear of the Lord is honour, and glory, and gladness, and a crown of rejoicing.
12. The fear of the Lord maketh a merry heart, and giveth joy, and gladness, and a long life.
13. Whoso feareth the Lord, it shall go well with him at the last, and he shall find favour in the day of his death.
14. To fear the Lord is the beginning of wisdom: and it was created with the faithful in the womb.
15. She hath built an everlasting foundation with men, and she shall continue with their seed.
16. To fear the Lord is fulness of wisdom, and filleth men with her fruits.
17. She filleth all their house with things desirable, and the garners with her increase.
18. The fear of the Lord is a crown of wisdom, making peace and perfect health to flourish; both which are the gifts of God: and it enlargeth their rejoicing that love him.
19. Wisdom raineth down skill and knowledge of understanding standing, and exalteth them to honour that hold her fast.
20. The root of wisdom is to fear the Lord, and the branches thereof are long life.
21. The fear of the Lord driveth away sins: and where it is present, it turneth away wrath.
22. A furious man cannot be justified; for the sway of his fury shall be his destruction.
23. A patient man will tear for a time, and afterward joy shall spring up unto him.
24. He will hide his words for a time, and the lips of many shall declare his wisdom.
25. The parables of knowledge are in the treasures of wisdom: but godliness is an abomination to a sinner.
26. If thou desire wisdom, keep the commandments, and the Lord shall give her unto thee.
27. For the fear of the Lord is wisdom and instruction: and faith and meekness are his delight.
28. Distrust not the fear of the Lord when thou art poor: and come not unto him with a double heart.
29. Be not an hypocrite in the sight of men, and take good heed what thou speakest.
30. Exalt not thyself, lest thou fall, and bring dishonour upon thy soul, and so God discover thy secrets, and cast thee down in the midst of the congregation, because thou camest not in truth to the fear of the Lord, but thy heart is full of deceit.
Ecclesiasticus (Sirach) 2 [Commentary]
1. My son, if thou come to serve the Lord, prepare thy soul for temptation.
2. Set thy heart aright, and constantly endure, and make not haste in time of trouble.
3. Cleave unto him, and depart not away, that thou mayest be increased at thy last end.
4. Whatsoever is brought upon thee take cheerfully, and be patient when thou art changed to a low estate.
5. For gold is tried in the fire, and acceptable men in the furnace of adversity.
6. Believe in him, and he will help thee; order thy way aright, and trust in him.
7. Ye that fear the Lord, wait for his mercy; and go not aside, lest ye fall.
8. Ye that fear the Lord, believe him; and your reward shall not fail.
9. Ye that fear the Lord, hope for good, and for everlasting joy and mercy.
10. Look at the generations of old, and see; did ever any trust in the Lord, and was confounded? or did any abide in his fear, and was forsaken? or whom did he ever despise, that called upon him?
11. For the Lord is full of compassion and mercy, longsuffering, and very pitiful, and forgiveth sins, and saveth in time of affliction.
12. Woe be to fearful hearts, and faint hands, and the sinner that goeth two ways!
13. Woe unto him that is fainthearted! for he believeth not; therefore shall he not be defended.
14. Woe unto you that have lost patience! and what will ye do when the Lord shall visit you?
15. They that fear the Lord will not disobey his Word; and they that love him will keep his ways.
16. They that fear the Lord will seek that which is well, pleasing unto him; and they that love him shall be filled with the law.
17. They that fear the Lord will prepare their hearts, and humble their souls in his sight,
18. Saying, We will fall into the hands of the Lord, and not into the hands of men: for as his majesty is, so is his mercy.
Ecclesiasticus (Sirach) 3 [Commentary]
1. Hear me your father, O children, and do thereafter, that ye may be safe.
2. For the Lord hath given the father honour over the children, and hath confirmed the authority of the mother over the sons.
3. Whoso honoureth his father maketh an atonement for his sins:
4. And he that honoureth his mother is as one that layeth up treasure.
5. Whoso honoureth his father shall have joy of his own children; and when he maketh his prayer, he shall be heard.
6. He that honoureth his father shall have a long life; and he that is obedient unto the Lord shall be a comfort to his mother.
7. He that feareth the Lord will honour his father, and will do service unto his parents, as to his masters.
8. Honour thy father and mother both in word and deed, that a blessing may come upon thee from them.
9. For the blessing of the father establisheth the houses of children; but the curse of the mother rooteth out foundations.
10. Glory not in the dishonour of thy father; for thy father's dishonour is no glory unto thee.
11. For the glory of a man is from the honour of his father; and a mother in dishonour is a reproach to the children.
12. My son, help thy father in his age, and grieve him not as long as he liveth.
13. And if his understanding fail, have patience with him; and despise him not when thou art in thy full strength.
14. For the relieving of thy father shall not be forgotten: and instead of sins it shall be added to build thee up.
15. In the day of thine affliction it shall be remembered; thy sins also shall melt away, as the ice in the fair warm weather.
16. He that forsaketh his father is as a blasphemer; and he that angereth his mother is cursed: of God.
17. My son, go on with thy business in meekness; so shalt thou be beloved of him that is approved.
18. The greater thou art, the more humble thyself, and thou shalt find favour before the Lord.
19. Many are in high place, and of renown: but mysteries are revealed unto the meek.
20. For the power of the Lord is great, and he is honoured of the lowly.
21. Seek not out things that are too hard for thee, neither search the things that are above thy strength.
22. But what is commanded thee, think thereupon with reverence, for it is not needful for thee to see with thine eyes the things that are in secret.
23. Be not curious in unnecessary matters: for more things are shewed unto thee than men understand.
24. For many are deceived by their own vain opinion; and an evil suspicion hath overthrown their judgment.
25. Without eyes thou shalt want light: profess not the knowledge therefore that thou hast not.
26. A stubborn heart shall fare evil at the last; and he that loveth danger shall perish therein.
27. An obstinate heart shall be laden with sorrows; and the wicked man shall heap sin upon sin.
28. In the punishment of the proud there is no remedy; for the plant of wickedness hath taken root in him.
29. The heart of the prudent will understand a parable; and an attentive ear is the desire of a wise man.
30. Water will quench a flaming fire; and alms maketh an atonement for sins.
31. And he that requiteth good turns is mindful of that which may come hereafter; and when he falleth, he shall find a stay.
nourable in riches, how much more in poverty?