James the Brother of Jesus Ossuary

Raymond:

The Bible says today what it said when the inspired men penned it. This has nothing to do with culture or those who you claim " cannonized" the Bible.

The fact is the inspired writings were in circulation long before they were collected. SEE Col. 4:16, I Thes. 5:26,27. The Bible was authenticated by the signs and wonders performed by those who spoke and wrote. See II Cor. 12:12, Mark 16:17-20, John 20:30,31 and a host of other passages.

Why should I believe mere men who collected the the books over those who spoke and wrote by inspiration confriming the word with signs following.

Finally, I can not answer the question about the family as we are not given that information. I would suggest that the physical family of Christ was absent at the cross. Thus, his statement to John.

There are many possibilities as to the location of his nuclear family. However, any statement as to the certainty of their location at the time of his crucifixion would be unfounded conjecture. I do not make statements of fact about a spiritual matter unless it can be factually proven.

 

Frank>>>
The Bible says today what it said when the inspired men penned it. This has nothing to do with culture or those who you claim " cannonized" the Bible.

The fact is the inspired writings were in circulation long before they were collected.<<<<


Frank,the problem is that the inspired writings were circulating with well over a hundred other uninspired writings which the Catholic Church took it upon herself to suppress. Among those writings, there were at least 30 other 'gospels'.

Do you believe the Catholic Church had the authority to censor those other writings, as she did, and proclaim the current 27 books as genuinely inspired and apostolic?

If we were to dig up one of these 'false gospels' from an ancient garbage dump, then take a couple of phrases and insert them into a new copy of your Bible, do you think the Holy Spirit would automatically alert you to which verses are bogus?

What about if you were a new, born-again Christian who had never read the Bible? Would the Holy Spirit still guide you infallibly to discern which verses were UNinspired?

I ask you this because this is the situation Christians of the 1st thru 4th centuries found themselves. There is no record of *anyone* before Athanasius in the 4th Cty who thought the NT should contain the exact list of 27 books that the Catholic Church, later, said it did.

Do you think, if you had lived before Athanasius, you would have figured out the Canon?

your brother

[ May 07, 2003, 09:17 AM: Message edited by: raymond ]

 

Raymond:
The documents were AUTHENTICATED before ANYONE COLLECTED THEM. SEE II Cor. 12:12, Mark 16:17-20.
The church knew the authenticity of a document because of the miraculus power that was demonstrated with it.

NNE has the power of the apostles had. If they did, they could do what they did. In fact, during the time fo the last apostle living, John, some men were claiming to do just as you suggest. The inspired John says they were tried and found to be LIARS. Rev. 2:2. I accept the inspired word of John over the biased and subjective view of biblical history.

 

Frank,

What then of the writings of the Apostles that were not recognized as inspired?

Or are you saying that miracles were directly attributed to individual writings of the Apostles and thereby recognized as inspired?

Ron

 

Ron:
Which documents? Written by Whom? Where is the proof these existed?

 

Other writings of the Apostles which were not included in the Bible.

There is a rather lengthy list. Walter Putnam posted it on the board a couple of times.

Perhaps he would be kind enough to do so again.

If he doesn't shortly, I will direct you to some sources.

Ron

 

Frank, you responded to my post without answering a single question. Allow me to repost my question/s and then you pick the question you think you can adequately answer>>>>

raymond>>>>
Do you believe the Catholic Church had the authority to censor those other writings, as she did, and proclaim the current 27 books as genuinely inspired and apostolic?

If we were to dig up one of these 'false gospels' from an ancient garbage dump, then take a couple of phrases and insert them into a new copy of your Bible, do you think the Holy Spirit would automatically alert you to which verses are bogus?

What about if you were a new, born-again Christian who had never read the Bible? Would the Holy Spirit still guide you infallibly to discern which verses were UNinspired?<<<<<<

btw, my separated brother, neither of the two Gospels authored by apostles, i.e. John and Matthew, even claim that for themselves. If the Catholic Church hadn't put Matthew's name on the front of his Gospel, do you think you could have figured out who wrote it? sorry for the extra question, but I am afraid there are a multitude of simple questions which you blissfully ignore.

Try answering one.

your brother

 

Raymond:
I answered your question. You just do not like the answer. The Catholic church has NO AUTHORITY IN ANY MATTER OF FAITH. Mat. 28:18-20. Christ does. This authority for ALL we practice and teach is found in his word. John 12:48, II Tim. 3:16,17, Jude 3.

Furthermore,there are NO SUCCESSORS to the apostles. Acts 8:17,18, John 16:13. In order to be an inspired man one must have the ability to confirm his inspiration with signs. NNE today has this power. If you claim the credentials have been changed, Who changed them? Who gave them the authority? And, how do we know? Therefore, no infallible man. In other words, no pope.

We have a mind to interpret any document. Who made one mind better than another? And, How do you know?

WHAT SPIRITUAL NEED IS NOT ADDRESSED BY THE NEW TESTAMENT OF CHRIST? II Tim. 3;16,17.

 

raymond>>>Do you believe the Catholic Church had the authority to censor those other writings, as she did, and proclaim the current 27 books as genuinely inspired and apostolic? <<<<


Frank>>>I answered your question. You just do not like the answer. The Catholic church has NO AUTHORITY IN ANY MATTER OF FAITH. <<<<


Frank,

now that IS an answer. Thank you. Now, of course I must ask another. If you truly believe that the Catholic Church has no authority, then why do you, e.g., believe Matthew wrote the Gospel to which the Catholic Church attached his name? I hate to break it to you, but those titles, e.g. Matthew, Mark, Luke, or John, are not part of the original text.

Better yet, why, if the Catholic Church has no authority, do you use her Bible? Have you never traced down the pedigree of where your Bible has been for the past 2000 years? Your Bible is 100% the product of manuscripts found in Catholic and Eastern Orthodox monasteries.

How much of your Bible was passed down to you thru the hands of the 'evangelical' scribes of the middle ages? Zero percent.

Your gratitude with regards receiving your Bible, mimicks your gratitude with regards to receiving Jesus from Mary. i.e. it is lacking and unbecoming.

your brother

 

After reading the whole thread, it has yet to be biblically affirmed that Mary remained a virgin.

I think it's possible that Mary remained a virgin, but it's more likely from a biblical view that the did not.

 

Johnv>>>After reading the whole thread, it has yet to be biblically affirmed that Mary remained a virgin.

I think it's possible that Mary remained a virgin, but it's more likely from a biblical view that the did not. <<<<

Dear Johnv,

Thanks for reading the whole thread! -you get time of purgatory for that-

If your willing to allow for the possibility that Mary was a perpetual virgin, then that is about all we can ask for. I believe there is an immense section of our Faith which I personally cannot see clearly taught in the Scriptures. e.g. the Trinity, monogamy, and opposition to slavery. Particularly if I limit myself to my own individual 21st Cty interpretation, and ignore everyone else who might have a better grasp of Greek, Hebrew, Greek culture, Greek-Hebrew culture, etc.

This ignoring others seems to be at the heart of 'sola scriptura'.

Nevertheless, since you are tuned in I would like your opinion about this brother-cousin controversy. Matthew lists James, Joses, Simon and Jude as brothers of Our Lord. Later on, in Matt.27:56 he mentions Mary 'mother of James and Joses' as among those beholding 'afar off'.

Do think these two, James and Joses are the same people in both verses? If they are, then their mother is not very likely Mary, Jesus' mother, as we know she was at the foot of the Cross. Besides that Matthew doesn't qualify Mary, Jesus' mother, when he names her. He does this with other Marys to distinguish them from her. Do you think this 'Mary mother of James and Joses' was our Lord's mother?

your brother

 

Raymond:
Your difficulty in answering scriptural questions is duely noted. I knew you would not answer them as they expose your false position.

 

Frank>>>Your difficulty in answering scriptural questions is duely noted. I knew you would not answer them as they expose your false position.<<<

Frank,

Pardon me, but I did not see a question to answer. Please point me out where you asked a question.

your brother

 

Raymond:
This is a copy of my previous post. The questions are in the SECOND THIRD AND FOURTH paragraphs. The last of which is in ALL CAPS for emphasis. I see it did not get your attention.


Raymond:
I answered your question. You just do not like the answer. The Catholic church has NO AUTHORITY IN ANY MATTER OF FAITH. Mat. 28:18-20. Christ does. This authority for ALL we practice and teach is found in his word. John 12:48, II Tim. 3:16,17, Jude 3.

Furthermore,there are NO SUCCESSORS to the apostles. Acts 8:17,18, John 16:13. In order to be an inspired man one must have the ability to confirm his inspiration with signs. NNE today has this power. If you claim the credentials have been changed, Who changed them? Who gave them the authority? And, how do we know? Therefore, no infallible man. In other words, no pope.

We have a mind to interpret any document. Who made one mind better than another? And, How do you know?

WHAT SPIRITUAL NEED IS NOT ADDRESSED BY THE NEW TESTAMENT OF CHRIST? II Tim. 3;16,17.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posts: 807 | From: Pine Mtn. Ga. | Registered: Mar 2002 | IP: Logged |

 

Frank>>>We have a mind to interpret any document. Who made one mind better than another? And, How do you know?

WHAT SPIRITUAL NEED IS NOT ADDRESSED BY THE NEW TESTAMENT OF CHRIST? II Tim. 3;16,17.<<<


Dear Frank,

With regards to spiritual needs, quite a number are not addressed by the NT.

I believe Jesus Christ left the world with a reliable and identifiable human teaching organization. The NT came along a number of years later. So for starters, the NT is not itself a human teacher, which is what each of needs. Otherwise Christ should not have bothered training mere humans, and should have spent his time writing the NT. I believe He left the world with mere humans to carry out His Great Commission because He thought that a reliable human teacher would be needed. A Book can never supply that need.

Another thing which would have been nice, if Christ was not going to leave identifiable and reliable teachers, would have been a concise table of contents. Frank, you seem to think that the table of contents is part of Matthew's preface. It ain't. I consider that to be a N/A, not addressed.

your brother

 

Raymond:
Human teachers are addressed in the new testament. I Tim.3: 1-11, Titus 1:4-9, II Tim. 2:2, II Tim. 4:1-4;2:25,26, James 3;1, Eph. 6:1-4; 4;12 and a host of other passages.

The table of contents is established by something no Catholic has ever had, the miraculous power to confirm the word with signs following. SEE Mark 16:17-20, II Cor. 12:12, John 20:30,31 and a host of other passages.

It would help you to read the new testament and you would have found it suffciient to make all men complete just as Paul said by inspiration. II Tim. 3;16,17.

 

raymond>>I believe Jesus Christ left the world with a reliable and identifiable human teaching organization. The NT came along a number of years later. So for starters, the NT is not itself a human teacher, which is what each of needs. ...... A Book can never supply that need.

Another thing which would have been nice, if Christ was not going to leave identifiable and reliable teachers, would have been a concise table of contents. Frank, you seem to think that the table of contents is part of Matthew's preface. It ain't. I consider that to be a N/A, not addressed.<<<<


Frank>>>>
Human teachers are addressed in the new testament. I Tim.3: 1-11, Titus 1:4-9, II Tim. 2:2, II Tim. 4:1-4;2:25,26, James 3;1, Eph. 6:1-4; 4;12 and a host of other passages. <<<<<

Frank, talking about something and being something are two different things. The NT sees the need for human apostolic teachers, yet it is not itself a human teacher.

Frank>>>>
The table of contents is established by something no Catholic has ever had, the miraculous power to confirm the word with signs following. SEE Mark 16:17-20, II Cor. 12:12, John 20:30,31 and a host of other passages.<<<

Which miracle did you personally witness? You have simply adopted the NT canon the Catholic Church used for 1,700 years before you were around. Don't you ever feel the slightest twinge of gratitude towards the Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox monks who copied the Scriptures before there were printing presses?

You remind me of myself, when I was a boy. I thought the neighborkids' Dad was a better father than mine because he bought me ice cream once. 100% of the Bible you have in your hand is gleaned from monasteries. What acknowledgment do you make of that other than adolescent sneers?

Frank>>>>
It would help you to read the new testament and you would have found it suffciient to make all men complete just as Paul said by inspiration. II Tim. 3;16,17. <<<<

nice one

 

Raymond:
One today does not have to see the miracle as proof of inspiration. I know this is only the Bible, and Jesus speaking, but Jesus did say," these are WRITTEN that you might believe." John 20:31. I have the confirmed word. Mark 16:17-20. It is sufficient for me unto ALL good works. Therefore, I need nothing else. II Tim. 3:16,17. If one is complete, what does he lack? If one is complete unto ALL good works, What good work does he lack?

 

Raymond>>>Which miracle did you personally witness? You have simply adopted the NT canon the Catholic Church used for 1,700 years before you were around. Don't you ever feel the slightest twinge of gratitude towards the Roman Catholic and Eastern Orthodox monks who copied the Scriptures before there were printing presses?

You remind me of myself, when I was a boy. I thought the neighborkids' Dad was a better father than mine because he bought me ice cream once. 100% of the Bible you have in your hand is gleaned from monasteries. What acknowledgment do you make of that other than adolescent sneers?<<<

Frank>>>>
One today does not have to see the miracle as proof of inspiration. I know this is only the Bible, and Jesus speaking, but Jesus did say," these are WRITTEN that you might believe." John 20:31. I have the confirmed word. Mark 16:17-20. It is sufficient for me unto ALL good works. Therefore, I need nothing else. II Tim. 3:16,17. If one is complete, what does he lack? If one is complete unto ALL good works, What good work does he lack? <<<<<<<

Dear Frank,

"only the Bible"? nice sarcasm.

The other 'gospels' which the Catholic Church repressed also tooted their own horns as being inspired. They also recorded miracles. How many of these other gospels have you read? Zero? Admit it, brother, you are blindly following the judgment of mere men, Catholic ones at that.

Otherwise you would have already submited each of these gospels to whatever test it was to which you put the Bible in order to personally determine that all of it was inspired.

I am still waiting to hear how thankful you are to those medaeval Catholic and Orthodox monks who
kept your Bible alive for you. I have a feeling I might be waiting a long time.

your brother

 

Raymond:

II Tim. 3:16,17 is so simple most schoolboys can understand it. A number of men have collected, and translated the Greek documents. I am thankful to God for the complete written revelation that makes men complete unto all good works.

Raymond, I am indebted to Christ, not to the Catholic church. In fact, your teaching magisterium has failed to provide anything other than division. Have you ever heard of the Old Catholic church? Well, so much for a magisterium. NO sarcasm, just the truth.