ChristiaNet MallWorld's Largest Christian MallChristian BlogsFree Bible QuizzesFree Ecards and Free Greeting CardsLoans, Debt, Business and Insurance Articles

Different Number Of Books

Why do not all Bible versions have 66 books?

Join Our Christian Singles and Take The Relationships Quiz
 ---1st_cliff on 4/30/12
     Helpful Blog Vote (2)

Post a New Blog



//"No, it wasn't.
Youm are a manifested loon."

TIt's typical, when I say Yes, then the sinner says No: and when I say No, then the sinner says Yes...bo-o-o-oring.
---Eloy on 5/11/12


\\began to be written down by Henoch in the 36th century B.C\\

No, it wasn't.

Youm are a manifested loon.

Christ is risen!
---Cluny on 5/11/12


Stongax, The Hebrew Brit Yashan supher or old testament book, called the TaNaKh, began to be written down by Henoch in the 36th century B.C., in B.C. 3507, and the old testament was completed in the 5th century B.C. in Nechemiahs time, in 458 B.C. I do not know of any scrolls of papyrus nor parchment of animal skins nor stone tablets that still exist which was first written over 5,500 years ago, but what we do have today are the faithful scribal copies of those original holy scriptures given from God to man. The Aleppo Codex is the oldest known complete manuscript of the Hebrew Bible.
---Eloy on 5/11/12


\\Except for the Qumran Dead Sea Scrolls, we don't have any Hebrew manuscripts older than 300 A.D. either.\\

Actually, until the discovery of the DSS, the oldest Hebrew mss were from 1000 or so.

**Glory to the REAL Jesus Christ!
---jerry6593 on 5/11/12**

You don't actually think you believe in Him, do you? Are you that deluded?

And what does evolution have to do with the subject of this blog?

++No early Christian church used the NonInspired septuagint.++

Yes, they did.

++I am a manifested saint and I translate the Holy Scriptures,++

No, youm're not, and no youm don't

Christ is risen!
---Cluny on 5/11/12


Eloy:

Except for the Qumran Dead Sea Scrolls, we don't have any Hebrew manuscripts older than 300 A.D. either. The oldest Masoretic Hebrew manuscripts are newer than the oldest Septuagint Greek manuscripts. These do disagree in several minor points.

But how do you explain that some of the Qumran manuscripts, written around 50-150 B.C., agree with the renditions in the Septuagint Greek and differ from the Masoretic Hebrew?

The only conclusion one can reach is that the Qumran manuscripts (and hence the Septuagint) represent an older (hence, more authentic) rendering than the Masoretic. If you disagree (and I am sure you probably do), please explain how this is possible otherwise.
---StrongAxe on 5/11/12




Cluny: "Unlike you, I'm willing to give God as much time"

How thoughtful of you! I'm sure God is delighted to have your permission.

The fact is that long age species development (especially with death before sin), gradual fossil bed layering (and local rather than universal flooding) are indeed Theistic Evolution. They are also quite anti-biblical, and are thus UNORTHODOX. Your claim to be Orthodox while clinging to such man-made, post-biblical doctrines is naive at best, and probably heretical at worst.

Glory to the REAL Jesus Christ!


---jerry6593 on 5/11/12


The 1st book of Enoch is dated at 300bc. Only Genesis is older at 500bc The rest of Enoch is dated around 100bc-ad. These are the oldest copies found.
Enoch as a person loved by God is not in doubt.
The problem is with the writings.
For example the forbidden knowledge includes astronomy and astrology. So it seems that the detailed description of the heavens that follows later is a contradiction of that.
Would Enoch after saying this is forbidden actually then detail it so broadly?
These are the sort of things that bring these books into question?

---chris on 5/11/12


catholicus, That is falsehood again. No early Christian church used the NonInspired septuagint. The research of Paul Kahle shows that no one has produced a Greek copy of the Old Testament written before 300 A.D. In fact, the Septuagint "quotes" from the New Testament and not vice versa, i.e. in the matter of NT - OT quotation, the later formulators of the Greek OT made it conform with the New Testament Text. What scholars refer to as "Septuagint papyri" are 24 pieces of paper, written 200 years after the death of Christ.
---Eloy on 5/11/12


I am a manifested saint and I translate the Holy Scriptures, and I have personally found that these NonBiblical writings are NonScripture and NonHoly. They contain many false doctrines. In the Wisdom of Solomon is found the false doctrine of reincarnation, in II Maccabees 15:11-14 contains the heresy that deceased saints are interceding in heaven for those on earth. But the Bible in I Tm.2:5+ Hb.4:14-16+ 8:1,2 teaches that it is the Lord Jesus Christ, our great High Priest, whom alone is the only Mediator for us in Heaven, and not any deceased saints, and in Tobit is the false doctrine of atoning for ones sins by paying alms, et cetera.
---Eloy on 5/11/12


The Eritrean and Ethiopian Orthodox Churches. Also the Beta Israel Jewish. Carry such books as Enoch. It is believed these are 2 of the oldest churches. They disputed the right of Constantine's council to decide that something that had been considered scripture was no longer considered so. When it had been well read for 100's of years.
The problem is that some of the books outside the Bible have discrepencies. Which does not mean they are all lies. Yet it calls them into question. Hence they were left out of canon.
I can explain more if anyone wishes.
---chris on 5/10/12




Eloy, that is very interesting, because the early church used the Septuagint almost exclusively during its first two centuries, and that version was the one from which the New Testament writers quoted. The Masoretic text did not even exist until about the year A.D. 1000, when vowel points were added.
---Catholicus on 5/10/12


Eloy:

You said: The apocrypha writings are proven to have never been Holy Scripture.

You use the word "proven" a lot (you had also said the Septuagint is "proven" corrupt), but just toss out such claims without any proof yourself. It is true that some CLAIM these things, but if they were ACTUALLY "proven", NOBODY would believe them. Please show us your proof.
---StrongAxe on 5/10/12


Catholicus, I got my information from the historical documentation on the source of the Holy Bible, and the criteria established for determination on which types of writings were proven to be NonInspired and NonScripture and on which types of writings are proven to be Inspired Scripture. And your posting of your falsehood shows your ignorance on the recorded history about the Received Masoretic Text.
---Eloy on 5/10/12


\\they were decided to no longer be bound within the same binding of the Holy Bible\\

Who made this decision, Eloy?

Can youm give their names?

Bet youm can't!

Christ is risen!
---Cluny on 5/10/12


Eloy,
you asked me to give you a book that is not in our bible that Paul makes reference to..
The book of Enoch.
He speaks about Enoch in Hebrews 11 and seems to know a great deal about him. More than just the verse in Genesis 5.

I really don't think that the Protestant movement should have removed books. It has spawned a lot of false religions because of that.
If it wasn't for my church pastor recommending reading the books that were removed, I would not extended my understanding of the word of God.
Those books were put there for a reason, and they should not have changed it.
---ginger on 5/10/12


Eloy, I don't know where you got your information. but it is faulty. In any case, Cluny has given you a satisfactory response.
---Catholicus on 5/10/12


Read These Insightful Articles About Online Marketing


\\And because of testimony that some people had left the faith because the apocrypha were proven to be untrue and nonscripture, they were decided to no longer be bound within the same binding of the Holy Bible.\\

Can youm give any of the names of such people?

Do youm know any of such people personally.

I just think youm are spouting meaningless--or untruthful--words.

Christ is risen!
---Cluny on 5/10/12


catholicus, you posted: "It seems that with the so-called Reformation certain books were jettisoned." There were never scriptures removed from the Holy Bible during the reformation. The apocrypha writings are proven to have never been Holy Scripture, and therefore they were "inserted" between the two testaments, and purposely kept out of both of the testaments. Just as dictionaries and maps are kept out of the scriptures and usually inserted at the back after the last scriptural book of Revelation. And because of testimony that some people had left the faith because the apocrypha were proven to be untrue and nonscripture, they were decided to no longer be bound within the same binding of the Holy Bible.
---Eloy on 5/10/12


Cluny, thank you for your response to Eloy. You answered him better than I would have.
---Catholicus on 5/10/12


\\ There were never scriptures removed from the Holy Bible during the reformation.\\

Yes, they were. They are accepted as scripture by ALL the pre-reformation Churches.

\\ The apocrypha writings are proven to have never been Holy Scripture,\\

No, they weren't.

\\ and therefore they were "inserted" between the two testaments, and purposely kept out of both of the testaments.\\

Wrong a third time. In the LXX and pre-Reformation Bibles, they are distributed among the other OT books.

Doesn't it bother youm to spout off about things youm clearly know nothing about?

Christ is risen!
---Cluny on 5/10/12


Read These Insightful Articles About VoIP Service


catholicus, you posted: "It seems that with the so-called Reformation certain books were jettisoned." There were never scriptures removed from the Holy Bible during the reformation. The apocrypha writings are proven to have never been Holy Scripture, and therefore they were "inserted" between the two testaments, and purposely kept out of both of the testaments. Just as dictionaries and maps are kept out of the scriptures and usually inserted at the back after the last scriptural book of Revelation. And because of testimony that some people had left the faith because the apocrypha were proven to be untrue and nonscripture, they were decided to no longer be bound within the same binding of the Holy Bible.
---Eloy on 5/10/12


Eloy, I am not sure what you are trying to tell me when you say my "seems" is a falsehood.
---Catholicus on 5/9/12


catholicus, your "seems" is falsehood.
---Eloy on 5/9/12


Eloy:

Whenever anyone says "The Bible does not say XYZ", and it does, in fact, say XYZ, it is very easy to refute them by just citing chapter and verse where XYZ is mentioned.

However, there are many cases where people commonly believe the Bible says XYZ, where it doesn't actually say so. When anyone points this out, they are often reviled by people who believe it does, but can't be bothered to actually look to make sure.
---StrongAxe on 5/8/12


Send a Free Funny Ecard


It seems that with the so-called Reformation certain books were jettisoned. But those books are still extant for those believing they should remain in the Bible.
---Catholicus on 5/8/12


cluny, unlearned people always posting untruths saying..."The Bible does not say this, nor that", when in fact the very thing which they post saying "The Bible nowhere says that". is in fact, the exact thing that the Bible documents. Either these people are not reading the Bible, or else making unfounded assumptions, or worse they are purposely trying to lead people away from the truth and down the path of lies into perdition.
---Eloy on 5/8/12


Samuel, a few days ago you posted this:

\\These books are not accepted as Canon by the jews but the Ortodox churches need them to be in order to support some of their doctrines.\\

Can you please tell me which Orthodox doctrines we turn to the Apocrypha for support, giving the book, chapter, and verse?

Second time of asking.

Christ is risen!
---Cluny on 5/8/12


Cluny: "Unlike you, I'm willing to give God as much time"

How thoughtful of you! I'm sure God is delighted to have your permission.

The fact is that long age species development (especially with death before sin), gradual fossil bed layering (and local rather than universal flooding) are indeed Theistic Evolution. They are also quite anti-biblical, and are thus UNORTHODOX. Your claim to be Orthodox while clinging to such man-made, post-biblical doctrines is naive at best, and probably heretical at worst.

Glory to the REAL Jesus Christ


---jerry6593 on 5/8/12


Read These Insightful Articles About Settlements


\\Cluny, I don't post "in other words", instead what I posted is, "Look it up".
---Eloy on 5/6/12\\

Eloy, nowhere does the Bible, not even in the Geneva version, give the DATE of the Lord's Nativity according to the flesh.

jerry, Theistic evolution is EXACTLY what Genesis 1 teaches: an orderly sequential development from simpler to more complex forms.

This is NOT the same thing as Darwinian or Lamarckian evolution.

Unlike you, I'm willing to give God as much time as He wishes to create things.

Christ is risen!
---Cluny on 5/7/12


Cluny: "Tell me when I've defended evolution, and the words I used to defend it."

You've got to be kidding! You have many times argued against fiat, 6-day creation and expressed the opinion that God may have used Theistic Evolution in continuing the creation process over long ages. Have you now come over from the dark side?

Glory to the REAL Jesus Christ!


---jerry6593 on 5/7/12


\\Then why do you defend it so vehemently? Is Sunday sacredness also a non-issue for the orthodox?\\

Tell me when I've defended evolution, and the words I used to defend it.

Since Christ came, ALL days are sacred and holy.

Christ is risen!
---Cluny on 5/6/12


Cluny, I don't post "in other words", instead what I posted is, "Look it up".
---Eloy on 5/6/12


Read These Insightful Articles About Internet Services


Cluny: "But you don't think that God used the SDA to decide what would be in the Bible, do you?"

I never made the claim that WE did, but you did for your pseudo-orthodox.


"Evolution is a non-issue for the Orthodox."

Then why do you defend it so vehemently? Is Sunday sacredness also a non-issue for the orthodox?


---jerry6593 on 5/6/12


\\cluny, I already posted this numerous times. Look it up.
---Eloy on 5/5/12\\

In other words, you cannot prove your contention.

Christ is risen!
---Cluny on 5/5/12


cluny, I already posted this numerous times. Look it up.
---Eloy on 5/5/12


Ginger, I have read through the Bible many times and I translate the holy scriptures from their original tongues. Please tell me where you find the reference to these books at which Paul mentions, then I will investigate them and post the results. Thank you kindly.
---Eloy on 5/5/12


Read These Insightful Articles About Online Stores


\\According to the Holy Scriptures, Jesus was born on December 25th, 5 B.C., and crucified on April 14th, 28 A.D.
---Eloy on 5/4/12\\

Book, chapter, and verse to prove your point, please, Eloy.

Christ is risen!
---Cluny on 5/5/12


ginger, that is falsehood.--eloy

No it isn't. Paul refers to several books that are not in our old testament.
And I believe Paul would certainly know what he is talking about because he knew all the books, the written and oral laws.

Thanks Cluny, I will check it out.
---ginger on 5/5/12


Ruben,
The writer of The witness of Matthew had to be an eye witness to the intimate details of Jesus' birth- Mt.1:18-25, and care enough to record the detailed genealogical account back to Abraham for the Jewish reader- Mt.1:1-17. Matthew's witness mentions his name more than the other three gospel witnesses. And Matthew's writing records a keen interest, as a tax collector, in accounting- Mt.18:23-24.

The witness of John highlights Jesus' deity and emphasizes Jesus' new commandment to "love one another" as Jesus loves. The witness of John wrote John because he says so, that the author is "the disciple whom Jesus loved"- Jn.21:20-24.
---Eloy on 5/4/12


According to the Holy Scriptures, Jesus was born on December 25th, 5 B.C., and crucified on April 14th, 28 A.D.
---Eloy on 5/4/12


Read These Insightful Articles About Business Training


\\Eloy: you end with: 'and finished by John around the 3rd decade A.D.'\\

But Jesus was not crucified until the early-middle FOURTH decade AD.

Christ is risen!
---Cluny on 5/4/12


ruben, Jn.21:25 reads, "IF all things Jesus did were written, I suppose the world could not contain the books." This verse does not read that other scriptures are written, nor is this verse stating that God is commanding someone to write down all that Jesus did.
---Eloy on 5/4/12


Peter, The Christians were being persecuted even before Jesus was crucified. And this is one reason why John was exiled to Patmos. Jesus was martyrd in 28 A.D. at 32 years of age, and John was one of Jesus' contemporaries. We have no Biblical record of John being martyrd, nor his continuing any journeyings after completing his 22 chapters of Revelation. Since the scripture is quiet of him being murdered, and no further excursions by him, we believe he died soon after his writing. This means that John wrote Revelation in the 3rd decade A.D. and died soon after his writing.
---Eloy on 5/4/12


Eloy: you end with: 'and finished by John around the 3rd decade A.D.'

If it was indeed ended in the 3rd century, it can't be John the disciple, though it is often regarded that he DID write it - he couldn't live that long?

Am I missing something out?
---Peter on 5/4/12


Read These Insightful Articles About Software


\\These books are not accepted as Canon by the jews but the Ortodox churches need them to be in order to support some of their doctrines.\\

Please give specific examples, Samuel.

Christ is risen!
---Cluny on 5/4/12


The main reason is that the Greek translation which non jews could read had extra books added called the apocrapha that were found in the Septuigent. These books are not accepted as Canon by the jews but the Ortodox churches need them to be in order to support some of their doctrines.
---Samuel on 5/4/12


ruben: God personally dictated his words to his holy prophets and apostles, and told them to write his words down in a book, in order to share his words with future generations (ref: Ex.17:14+ Dt.6:6-9+ Rev.1:1-3,11,19). Now because there are fakes and NonChristians among the sheep, we are told to hold fast to that which has already been proven true, and not turn aside to fables and to other NonChristian writings. "To the law and to the testimony: if they speak not according to this word, because they have no light in them. If any preach any other gospel to you than that you all have received, let him be accursed." Is.8:20+ I Gal.1:9.
---Eloy on 5/4/12


1) Valid authorship- the scripture had to be written by an Apostle, or a holy man inspired by God.
2) Right doctrine- the scripture had to be in accord with Jesus' commandments and teachings.
3) The N.T. began to be recorded by Matthew in 5 B.C., and finished by John around the 3rd decade A.D.

on 5/4/12

Eloy,


Going by scripture alone which you cling to:

1) Where does it say that it has to be done by an Apostles or an inspired man of God?

2) But John Gospel tell us that not everything Jesus did was written down(JHn 21:25)

3) Who wrote the Gospel of Matthew and John? Chapter and verse please!
---Ruben on 5/4/12


Read These Insightful Articles About Advertising


Ginger: 'And OT scripture points...'

It is very hard to actually get a definite answer to what the OT points to. As of yet, I have not found any direct reference to any other books (as in 'and it is written that', followed by words that we don't have in our OT).

But that it only to say we don't have direct reference, not that there are not.

There could be, but we would need to go through a more complicated check, where different people might get different results!

Blessings
---Peter on 5/4/12


Peter,
The early church's acceptance of the Biblical New Testament canon:

1) Valid authorship- the scripture had to be written by an Apostle, or a holy man inspired by God.
2) Right doctrine- the scripture had to be in accord with Jesus' commandments and teachings.
3) Date written- the scripture had to be written between 5 B.C.(from Christ's birth), and 29-30 A.D.(soon after Christ's death and resurrection). The N.T. began to be recorded by Matthew in 5 B.C., and finished by John around the 3rd decade A.D.
4) Usage- the scripture had to be accepted and read in the Christian temples around the Mediterranean and Palestine and the Middle East.
---Eloy on 5/4/12


The part that really bothers me is that for centuries discussions,meetings,synods,counsils etc "hammered out" the "canon" then call it 'inspired"
True history does not need inspiration!
What is inspired and what is not (NT) is pure speculation to satisfy the "religious" element among us!
As for "claims" Joseph Smith claims inspiration as does Mohammed.
AH but we just know they are not! Don't we???
---1st_cliff on 5/4/12


ginger, that is falsehood. For there is a large difference between "Holy" scripture, and "unholy" writings. For example, the so-called "book of Jasher" (ref: Js.10:13+ II Sm.1:18) is not a person's name at all. The Hebrew is, "Sefer Ha-yasher", which in English would be translated, "the upright book". As for the reference to Henoch's writing in the scriptures, there's strong evidence that he is the author of the first five books of the old testament, and not Moses, as Deuteronomy 33:4 reads, "Moses commanded us a law", which clearly reveals that Moses himself did not write this, else he would have written, "I commanded", and not "Moses commanded".
---Eloy on 5/4/12


Read These Insightful Articles About Eating Disorders


\\Do you think that the lives we live before God and decide to write down how we were before and after God came and changed us as testimony, would be adding to the word of God?\\

Of course not. Spiritual autobiographies, such as Augustine's Confessions, Bunyan's GRACE ABOUNDING TO THE CHIEF OF SINNERS, and Newman's APOLOGIA PRO VITA SUA have been a big part of Christian literature for centuries.

\\Also, can you recommend a version of the bible that has all the books that way I have easy access to them?\\

Yes. The Orthodox Study Bible. Contact Conciliar Press.

Christ is risen!
---Cluny on 5/4/12


Peter,
The evidence that there are more inspired books is actually inside the Bible. Paul quotes a lot from OT scripture.
And OT scripture points to other books that are not in the Bible that should be.
The proof is to measure scripture with scripture.
---ginger on 5/4/12


Eloy: 'Bearing false witness, and lying, is a serious offense to God'

I agree. However, while we have the 66 books, what evidence is there that there were not more that were inspired.

Personally, I doubt that, but before we are to say that something is an offense to God, we have to prove it is not true, and that requires us to prove that ONLY the 66 are true.

What real evidence to we actually have?
---Peter on 5/3/12


This is an assumption at best, no way to verify it!
---1st_cliff on 5/2/12

Actually, we can verify it. Paul utilizes his knowledge of ot scripture and quotes a lot of it in his letters to the various churches.
This is why the Bible should never have been shortened in the first place.
Paul knew all of what God had said because of what he was before God made him a new creature in Christ.
---ginger on 5/2/12


Read These Insightful Articles About Travel Packages


Cluny,
Do you think that the lives we live before God and decide to write down how we were before and after God came and changed us as testimony, would be adding to the word of God?
just a general question.
Also, can you recommend a version of the bible that has all the books that way I have easy access to them?
Thanks?
---ginger on 5/2/12


Who appointed Paul as God's spokesman so that every word Paul wrote is "God breathed?"
This is an assumption at best, no way to verify it!
---1st_cliff on 5/2/12


Christians and Jews have the exact same books of the Bible. And catholics and other religions have their own books, and the catholics have also added apocryphas to their bibles, and they have other books like misals and catechisms that they use.
---Eloy on 5/2/12


\\But the kind of "adding to" which is right\\

But Eloy does WRONG adding to of God's Word, as people who have seen his mistranslations know.

Christ is risen!
---Cluny on 5/2/12


Read These Insightful Articles About Credit Repair


Amen Cluny!!
And that is how the Bible should be read. My pastor is the one who first told me of that.
THink on this,when we write a letter, does it have chapters and verses in it? No it does not.
None of Pauls writings had this either. It was one continuous letter, addressing issues and questions. They are continous not broken down.
The only reason the bible has chapters and verses is for reference.
The early church used way more books than our bible today contains.
---ginger on 5/2/12


"adding to" or the "taking away" from means do not add to nor leave out any thing of God's clear word in order to change his clear word into a different meaning. But the kind of "adding to" which is right, would be the "continued speaking" of God's words, for God has not ceased talking nor revealing his voice even today, for he is not dead and still very much alive and communicating to his people daily. For example, if God tells me to give $20 to my neighbor in need. You will not find that detailed in the Bible, but it is "adding to" the Bible where it reads, "Give to the poor, and it is more blessed to give than to receive, and lay up treasure in heaven." Please Read- Jn.16:13+ 21:25.
---Eloy on 5/2/12


\\Eloy we are given a strong warning in revelation that addresses changing Gods Word.
---Shira4368 on 5/1/12\\

What do you mean by "changing God's Word," Shira?

Chapter and verse divisions do just that, as they are not in the original. Neither is punctuation, for that matter.

Christ is risen!
---Cluny on 5/1/12


1st Cliff, Some religions include "other" noninspired books, called apocrypha and pseudepigrapha, in their so-called Bibles that are not from God. God makes it clear in his word that no one is to add to, nor to take away from his word, else they be found a liar and God will take away their place from heaven. Bearing false witness, and lying, is a serious offense to God, and also shows a person's disrespect for the truth and shows contempt for God's word. Satan is always twisting scripture, adding to or taking away from or changing the words from God, in order to lead people down into perdition. I strongly encourage all to stay with the Holy Bible, and do not allow any other words which are a defilement and a deprecation.
---Eloy on 5/2/12


Read These Insightful Articles About Christian Products


Cluny: "But you don't think that God used the SDA to decide what would be in the Bible, do you?"

I never made the claim that WE did, but you did for your pseudo-orthodox.


"Evolution is a non-issue for the Orthodox."

Then why do you defend it so vehemently? Is Sunday sacredness also a non-issue for the orthodox?


---jerry6593 on 5/2/12


Eloy we are given a strong warning in revelation that addresses changing Gods Word.
---Shira4368 on 5/1/12


Keven you sati better than I have heard before. If our bible evolve the way atheist and people like them it will leave out heaven, God, hell, Satan. Demons,. Some of the new versions are taking diety out of Christ. I will just stick with the old stuff meaning my king James 1611.
---Shira4368 on 5/1/12


People may have added or taken away from the number of inspired books, and therefore they have a different number of books. I know traditionally, the Jews added some books together into one, like Ezra and Nehemiah they count as one, and some others that are titles book I and book II of the same name may be added together into one book.
---Eloy on 5/1/12


Read These Insightful Articles About Christian Divorce


\\They recognize and accept as inspired 49 books of the OT and 27 books of the NT. Right?\\

Basically.

There is minor disagreement about how these books are divided. (Is Baruch part of Jeremiah? Is the Letter of Jeremiah separate, or part of either? And so it goes.)

BTW, I'm not familiar with the canon of the NT accepted by the Syriac (that's what they call themselves, not "Syrian") Church, which is non-Chalcedonian, and therefore not Orthodox.

If you really what to know that the Syriac Church considers canonical, you can contact their bishops in the United States. They have a web site.

Christ is risen!
---Cluny on 5/1/12


I don't think it was meant for those writings to only be what the orthodox said.
And when it was happening, there were many hot debates about what books would be declared holy writings.
I believe God meant for us to read all of them. I also believe we would understand better if we do read all of them and allow the Holy Spirit to teach.
The first churches (before the established books) utilized most if not all of those writings.
There are books in the bible that Cluny reads that are incredible works of God. And if had not been encouraged by my pastor, I would never have read them and learned.
---ginger on 5/1/12


Because the Bible evolved from 220 books to 72 books then evolved again to 66 books and now is evolving to not even mention Jesus anymore....
---kevin5443 on 5/1/12


Cluny,As I have often said ,the bible is not a single book (Only since reformation) but a collection of Holy writings,
Official Orthodox view!
They recognize and accept as inspired 49 books of the OT and 27 books of the NT. Right?
---1st_cliff on 5/1/12


Read These Insightful Articles About Christian Marriage


\\We? We who? Are we (CN) to believe that you (Cluny) had a part in it?\\

Not me personally.

But you don't think that God used the SDA to decide what would be in the Bible, do you?

Evolution is a non-issue for the Orthodox.

Christ is risen!
---Cluny on 5/1/12


Cluny: "Only ORTHODOXY retains the original Bible. After all, we wrote it."

We? We who? Are we (CN) to believe that you (Cluny) had a part in it?

Also, did that original ORTHODOXY contain the belief in Theistic Evolution?


---jerry6593 on 5/1/12


Cluny: The Syrian "Orthodox" bible does not include 2 Peter,Jude,2-3 John and Revelation. How does that work? They wrote it??
---1st_cliff on 5/1/12


Copyright© 1996-2015 ChristiaNet®. All Rights Reserved.