Did They Need It?

Anonymous
Anonymous

January 8th, 2013, 2:11 pm #41

Did Jesus have to supply wine for the wedding for the wedding to be a success? Was He fulfilling the desire to continue a tradition of having wine at the marriage celebration?
Which leads one to another thought.....considering the above dilemma and thought....would Jesus object to the tradition of instrumental music (compared to the tradition of voice only)? We don't need instruments to worship God (no more than they needed wine for a Marriage celebration), but the instruments would not preclude a meaningful worship to God (no more than wine would hinder a meainingful marriage celebration)......now would they???





HAPPY NEW YEARS!!!

=========================

[color=#0000FF" size="3" face="times]David Fields, let's be honest and unashamed: claim [ ]the message you authored.[/color]
Donnie, you listed below the books not included beyond the 66.....If that is what YOU want for YOUR truth, then that is your decision. The rest of us have accepted the 66 COMPLETE works/books of His present and beautiful Word that God set upon faithful men's hearts. Those books below were not decided upon not because of what man would have....but what God directed, in their hearts and mind, to act upon. This was done because GOD wanted it done. You and many others like you just will never accept that God, in His Power, Majesty, and Wisdom, knew what He was doing when those 66 books became His Complete Word. Will it be Dave or Annie today?

Tobit
Judith
1 Maccabees
2 Maccabees
Wisdom (of Solomon)
Ben Sira
Baruch, includes Letter of Jeremiah (Additions to Jeremiah)
Additions to Daniel
Additions to Esther


Included by Orthodox (Synod of Jerusalem):

1 Esdras (see Esdras for other names)
3 Maccabees
4 Maccabees (in appendix but not canonical)
Prayer of Manasseh
Psalm 151


Included by Russian and Ethiopian Orthodox:

2 Esdras

[color=#0000FF" size="4" face="times]Dave [a.k.a. Annie Mouse][/color]

==================

[color=#0000FF" size="3" face="times]Dave Fields, it really got your attention this time!!! You asked, "Will it be Dave or Annie today?" Great question. Now, what do you think of my answer?[/color]
Last edited by Donnie.Cruz on January 9th, 2013, 3:52 am, edited 1 time in total.
Quote
Share

Joined: July 29th, 2010, 2:32 pm

January 8th, 2013, 9:08 pm #42

My copies of the Apocrypha some annotated.

http://www.piney.com/ApocryIndex.html

The present Latin Vulgate: Erasmus worked from the Latin since there was no Greek New Testament (as a book). I believe that my NEV has the same CANON.

Latin Vulgate

Genesis [Genesis]
Exodus [Exodus]
Leviticus [Leviticus]
Numbers [Numbers]
Deuteronomy [Deuteronomy]
Joshua [Joshua]
Judges [Judges]
Ruth [Ruth]
1 Samuel [1 Samuel]
2 Samuel [2 Samuel]
1 Kings [1 Kings]
2 Kings [2 Kings]
1 Chronicles [1 Chronicles]
2 Chronicles [2 Chronicles]
Latin Vulgate [Prayer of Azariah]
Latin Vulgate [Prayer of Azariah]
Tobit [Tobit]
Judith [Judith]
Esther [Esther]
Job [Job]
Psalm [Psalm]
Proverbs [Proverbs]
Ecclesiastes [Ecclesiastes]
Canticles [Song]
Wisdom [Wisdom]
Ecclesiasticus [Sirach]
Isaiah [Isaiah]
Jeremiah [Jeremiah]
Lamentations [Lamentations]
Baruch [Baruch]
Ezekiel [Ezekiel]
Daniel [Daniel]
Hosea [Hosea]
Joel [Joel]
Amos [Amos]
Obadiah [Obadiah]
Jonah [Jonah]
Micah [Micah]
Nahum [Nahum]
Habakkuk [Habakkuk]
Zephaniah [Zephaniah]
Haggai [Haggai]
Zechariah [Zechariah]
Malachi [Malachi]
1 Maccabees [1 Maccabees]
2 Maccabees [2 Maccabees]
Matthew [Matthew]
Mark [Mark]
Luke [Luke]
John [John]
Acts [Acts]
Romans [Romans]
1 Corinthians [1 Corinthians]
2 Corinthians [2 Corinthians]
Galatians [Galatians]
Ephesians [Ephesians]
Philippians [Philippians]
Colossians [Colossians]
1 Thessalonians [1 Thessalonians]
2 Thessalonians [2 Thessalonians]
1 Timothy [1 Timothy]
2 Timothy [2 Timothy]
Titus [Titus]
Philemon [Philemon]
Hebrews [Hebrews]
James [James]
1 Peter [1 Peter]
2 Peter [2 Peter]
1 John [1 John]
2 John [2 John]
3 John [3 John]
Jude [Jude]
Revelation [Revelation]
1 Esdras [1 Esdras]
2 Esdras [Ezra]
Latin Vulgate [Prayer of Azariah

Last edited by Ken.Sublett on January 8th, 2013, 9:12 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: July 29th, 2010, 2:32 pm

January 8th, 2013, 9:46 pm #43

[color=#0000FF" size="3" face="times]Dave,

Unlike those of us who are unwilling to compromise the truth, you continue to: (a) belittle the church that Christ built, (b) downgrade its scriptural standards, (c) misrepresent the fact that churches of Christ (with the exception of a few congregations whose mis-LEADERS have chosen to apostatize) DO NOT ENGAGE in operating man-made, inanimate, lifeless musical devices in the assembly of saints.

Unlike you, I must defend the church that Christ established. Contrary to your erroneous characterization of "church tradition," the Scripture says differently about "the tradition ... received of us [the apostles]" (II Thess. 3:6).

Surprise! Surprise! The church of Christ does not follow man-made traditions (with the exception of certain congregations that "behave" just like "the other nations," a.k.a. [DENOMI-]nations). Rather, the church of Christ follows the teachings of Christ and His apostles.

It is not that we should reject apostolic tradition -- it is for the church to follow. "Therefore, brethren, stand fast, and hold the traditions which ye have been taught, whether by word, or our epistle" (II Thess. 2:15).

Rather, it is that we should reject man-made traditions. The Scripture speaks about man-made traditions. The church is warned to "beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world, and not after Christ" (Col. 2:8).

I'll simplify matters for you, Dave. Here are examples of MAN-MADE traditions that the church is to reject:[/color]
<ol>[*][color=#0000FF" size="3" face="times]Offer of prayers for the dead[/color]
</li>[*][color=#0000FF" size="3" face="times]Use of wax Candles for their rituals[/color]
</li>[*][color=#0000FF" size="3" face="times]Veneration of angels and dead saints[/color]
</li>[*][color=#0000FF" size="3" face="times]Worship of Mary, the mother of Jesus, and the use of the term, "Mother of God"[/color]
</li>[*][color=#0000FF" size="3" face="times]Priests began to dress differently from the laity[/color]
</li>[*][color=#0000FF" size="3" face="times]Extreme Unction[/color]
</li>[*][color=#0000FF" size="3" face="times]Doctrine of Purgatory, first established by Gregory the Great[/color]
</li>[*][color=#0000FF" size="3" face="times]Prayers directed to Mary, or to dead saints[/color]
</li>[*][color=#0000FF" size="3" face="times]Papacy: of pagan origin; the title of pope or universal bishop, was first given to the bishop of Rome by the wicked emperor Phocas[/color]
</li>[*][color=#0000FF" size="3" face="times]Kissing of the Pope's feet[/color]
</li>[*][color=#0000FF" size="3" face="times]Worship of the cross, images and relics[/color]
</li>[*][color=#0000FF" size="3" face="times]Baptism of bells, instituted by Pope John XIV[/color]
</li>[*][color=#0000FF" size="3" face="times]Canonization of dead saints, first by Pope John XV[/color]
</li>[*][color=#0000FF" size="3" face="times]Fasting on Fridays and during Lent[/color]
</li>[*][color=#0000FF" size="3" face="times]Celibacy of the priesthood: decreed by Pope Hildebrand, Boniface VII[/color]
</li>[*][color=#0000FF" size="3" face="times]Rosary, or prayer beads introduced by Peter the Hermit
[/color]</li>[*][color=#0000FF" size="3" face="times]Worship with musical instruments[/color]
</li>[*]... etc. ... etc. ... etc.
</li>[/list][color=#0000FF" size="3" face="times]Obviously, the above activities and practices are traditions of the Roman Catholic Church. And its members are willing to defend their traditions, although many of them are actually heresies and are of pagan nature.

Here's an observation: I think you, Dave, may be willing to reject most of the man-made traditions listed above. But you are willing to surely defend ONE man-made tradition -- worship with musical instruments. Uh-oh. Does anyone recall the historical fact relating to when instrumental music in worship in "Christianity" began? I know that this man-made tradition was originated by the Roman Catholic Church and propagated by Protestant Churches.[/color]
Diabolic Agency in Storms: BAPTIZING BELLS.

http://www.piney.com/AwkWhite02Bells.html

Thomas Paine: the father of your Civil and Religious Liberty.

http://www.piney.com/PaineWorshipBells.html

Last edited by Ken.Sublett on January 8th, 2013, 9:48 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Quote
Like
Share

Rocky
Rocky

January 8th, 2013, 10:10 pm #44

My copies of the Apocrypha some annotated.

http://www.piney.com/ApocryIndex.html

The present Latin Vulgate: Erasmus worked from the Latin since there was no Greek New Testament (as a book). I believe that my NEV has the same CANON.

Latin Vulgate

Genesis [Genesis]
Exodus [Exodus]
Leviticus [Leviticus]
Numbers [Numbers]
Deuteronomy [Deuteronomy]
Joshua [Joshua]
Judges [Judges]
Ruth [Ruth]
1 Samuel [1 Samuel]
2 Samuel [2 Samuel]
1 Kings [1 Kings]
2 Kings [2 Kings]
1 Chronicles [1 Chronicles]
2 Chronicles [2 Chronicles]
Latin Vulgate [Prayer of Azariah]
Latin Vulgate [Prayer of Azariah]
Tobit [Tobit]
Judith [Judith]
Esther [Esther]
Job [Job]
Psalm [Psalm]
Proverbs [Proverbs]
Ecclesiastes [Ecclesiastes]
Canticles [Song]
Wisdom [Wisdom]
Ecclesiasticus [Sirach]
Isaiah [Isaiah]
Jeremiah [Jeremiah]
Lamentations [Lamentations]
Baruch [Baruch]
Ezekiel [Ezekiel]
Daniel [Daniel]
Hosea [Hosea]
Joel [Joel]
Amos [Amos]
Obadiah [Obadiah]
Jonah [Jonah]
Micah [Micah]
Nahum [Nahum]
Habakkuk [Habakkuk]
Zephaniah [Zephaniah]
Haggai [Haggai]
Zechariah [Zechariah]
Malachi [Malachi]
1 Maccabees [1 Maccabees]
2 Maccabees [2 Maccabees]
Matthew [Matthew]
Mark [Mark]
Luke [Luke]
John [John]
Acts [Acts]
Romans [Romans]
1 Corinthians [1 Corinthians]
2 Corinthians [2 Corinthians]
Galatians [Galatians]
Ephesians [Ephesians]
Philippians [Philippians]
Colossians [Colossians]
1 Thessalonians [1 Thessalonians]
2 Thessalonians [2 Thessalonians]
1 Timothy [1 Timothy]
2 Timothy [2 Timothy]
Titus [Titus]
Philemon [Philemon]
Hebrews [Hebrews]
James [James]
1 Peter [1 Peter]
2 Peter [2 Peter]
1 John [1 John]
2 John [2 John]
3 John [3 John]
Jude [Jude]
Revelation [Revelation]
1 Esdras [1 Esdras]
2 Esdras [Ezra]
Latin Vulgate [Prayer of Azariah

By the 4th century, the Book of Enoch was mostly excluded from Christian canons, and nowadays it is not regarded as scripture by any Christian group, with the exception of the Ethiopian Orthodox Church, the Eritrean Orthodox Church and the Concerned Members Internet Web Site........
Quote
Share

B
B

January 8th, 2013, 10:13 pm #45

Donnie, you listed below the books not included beyond the 66.....If that is what YOU want for YOUR truth, then that is your decision. The rest of us have accepted the 66 COMPLETE works/books of His present and beautiful Word that God set upon faithful men's hearts. Those books below were not decided upon not because of what man would have....but what God directed, in their hearts and mind, to act upon. This was done because GOD wanted it done. You and many others like you just will never accept that God, in His Power, Majesty, and Wisdom, knew what He was doing when those 66 books became His Complete Word. Will it be Dave or Annie today?

Tobit
Judith
1 Maccabees
2 Maccabees
Wisdom (of Solomon)
Ben Sira
Baruch, includes Letter of Jeremiah (Additions to Jeremiah)
Additions to Daniel
Additions to Esther


Included by Orthodox (Synod of Jerusalem):

1 Esdras (see Esdras for other names)
3 Maccabees
4 Maccabees (in appendix but not canonical)
Prayer of Manasseh
Psalm 151


Included by Russian and Ethiopian Orthodox:

2 Esdras

[color=#0000FF" size="4" face="times]Dave [a.k.a. Annie Mouse][/color]

==================

[color=#0000FF" size="3" face="times]Dave Fields, it really got your attention this time!!! You asked, "Will it be Dave or Annie today?" Great question. Now, what do you think of my answer?[/color]
Dave says that 66 books comprise the "complete" canon, but only because mortal men SAID those were the books of the canon. Dave, who believes the decision of fallible men long ago, STILL cannot (and never ever will) show us where the Scriptures state that the canon is absolutely complete with 66 books. For all we know, God, in His own good time, intended for man to discover other inspired books. Since the books in what we now call the "canon" were not all written at the same time, then it's possible that other books await man to come to his senses and recognize that they were also inspired and, hence, belong in the canon.

But Dave will continue to think, "Nope, nope, the canon is ONLY 66 books. That be IT, no more! All them other books be of the devil, especially Enoch!"
Quote
Share

Rocky
Rocky

January 9th, 2013, 12:36 am #46

Yes, maybe they will be found on "Gold Plates" and "B" can move to Salt Lake City?
Quote
Share

Joined: July 29th, 2010, 2:32 pm

January 9th, 2013, 12:45 am #47

Did Jesus have to supply wine for the wedding for the wedding to be a success? Was He fulfilling the desire to continue a tradition of having wine at the marriage celebration?
Which leads one to another thought.....considering the above dilemma and thought....would Jesus object to the tradition of instrumental music (compared to the tradition of voice only)? We don't need instruments to worship God (no more than they needed wine for a Marriage celebration), but the instruments would not preclude a meaningful worship to God (no more than wine would hinder a meainingful marriage celebration)......now would they???





HAPPY NEW YEARS!!!

=========================

[color=#0000FF" size="3" face="times]David Fields, let's be honest and unashamed: claim [ ]the message you authored.[/color]
We can use Enoch as one of the UNIVERSAL literate and spiritual writers to DARE any musicator to find JUST ONE scholar to TRUMP the 100% use of MUSICAL PERFORMANCE other than by warriors, sacrificial exorcists, making war or seducing males by prostitutes. The Spirit OF Christ,after all, Identified the king of Tyre with LUCIFER as "the singing and harp playing prostitute."

We do not need the Universal Spirit to tell us that musical performers arouse all of our pleasure centers. Why do they do that? They do that to force YOU to engage in THEIR "making the lambs dumb before the slaughter." The Vineyard lady aka wineskinners BOAST that the new style praise singing is to force you into a SEXUAL-LIKE CLIMAX WITH THE SPIRIT. Plato told us all about that.

Tertullian in De Spectaculis: Ritual battles of idolatry

http://www.piney.com/WinTertDeSpec.html

Chapter III. Direct Commands of God and Necessary Inferences
Fortified by this knowledge against heathen views, let us rather turn to the unworthy reasonings of our own people;
<font color="#FFFFFF">.....
for the faith of some, either too simple or too scrupulous,
.....demands direct authority from Scripture for giving up the shows,
.....and holds out that the matter is a doubtful one,
.....because such abstinence is not clearly and in words imposed upon God's servants.

Well, we never find it expressed with the same precision,

"Thou shalt not enter circus or theatre, thou shalt not look on combat or show;"
as it is plainly laid down, "Thou shalt not kill; thou shalt not worship an idol; thou shalt not commit adultery or fraud." Ex. xx. 14.

But we find that that first word of David bears on this very sort of thing: "Blessed," he says, "is the man who has not gone into the assembly of the impious, nor stood in the way of sinners, nor sat in the seat of scorners." Ps. i. 1.

[Necessary Inferences]

Though he seems to have predicted beforehand of that just man, that he took no part in the meetings and deliberations of the Jews, taking counsel about the slaying of our Lord,

yet divine Scripture has ever far-reaching applications: after the immediate sense has been exhausted, in all directions it fortifies the practice of the religious life, so that here also you have an utterance which is not far from a plain interdicting of the shows.

If he called those few Jews an assembly of the wicked,

how much more will he so designate so vast a gathering of heathens! Are the heathens less impious, less sinners, less enemies of Christ, than the Jews were then? And see, too, how other things agree. For at the shows they also stand in the way.

For they call the spaces between the seats going round the amphitheatre, and the passages which separate the people running down, ways. The place in the curve where the matrons sit is called a chair.

Therefore, on the contrary, it holds, unblessed is he who has entered any council of wicked men, and has stood in any way of sinners, and has sat in any chair of scorners.

Definining the theater
Ps 1:1 Blessed is the man that walketh not in the counsel of the ungodly,
.....nor standeth in the way of sinners,
.....nor sitteth in the seat of the scornful.
Ps 1:2 But his delight is in the law of the LORD; and in his law doth he meditate day and night.
Ps 1:3 And he shall be like a tree planted by the rivers of water, that bringeth forth his fruit in his season;
.....his leaf also shall not wither; and whatsoever he doeth shall prosper.
Ps 1:4 The ungodly are not so: but are like the chaff which the wind driveth away.
Ps 1:5 Therefore the ungodly shall not stand in the judgment,
.....nor sinners in the congregation of the righteous.
Ps 1:6 For the LORD knoweth the way of the righteous:
.....but the way of the ungodly shall perish.

We may understand a thing as spoken generally, even when it requires a certain special interpretation to be given to it.

For some things spoken with a special reference contain in them general truth.
When God admonishes the Isrealites of their duty, or sharply reproves them,
.....He has surely a reference to all men; inferences
.....He surely pre-condemns every sinning nation, whatever.

If, reasoning from species to genus, every nation that sins against them is an Egypt and Ethiopia;
so also, reasoning from genus to species, with reference to the origin of shows, every show is an assembly of the wicked.


</font>
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: July 29th, 2010, 2:32 pm

January 9th, 2013, 12:56 am #48

Yes, maybe they will be found on "Gold Plates" and "B" can move to Salt Lake City?
Re-visioning church or Re-imaging church, Woodmont Hills: Rubel Shelly, Lynn Anderson:

http://www.piney.com/RSReImaging.html

Rubel Shelly: April 4-6, 2002 Putting on a new pair of glasses makes what was distorted now focused and clear.

We see the world as it really is -
not what our old glasses led us to see.

The Body of Christ needs to re-vision - to look through new glasses for a fresh perspective.


Lynn Anderson: The mind-set of the times threatens to strip our faith of symbols, rituals, dramas, mystery, poetry, and story,

which say about life and God what logic and reason and rationalism can never say.


"Evangelicals are beginning to build their theologies around what it means for man to be in the presence of God [rather than around the objective truth of the Word of God].

"Influenced by the wider Christian world, evangelicals who have adopted either a relational (incarnational in his words) approach or a charismatic ("neo-pentecostal") approach to their theology are more and more challenging their fellow believers to rethink the Gospel from the standpoint of their own experience with it. Their claim is that traditional evangelical theology is largely irrelevant or inadequate." (MacArthur, John, Charismatic Chaos, p. 45, Zondervan).


I have the plates even though Rubel Shelly thinks that HE has found them.

Quote
Like
Share

B
B

January 9th, 2013, 1:06 am #49

By the 4th century, the Book of Enoch was mostly excluded from Christian canons, and nowadays it is not regarded as scripture by any Christian group, with the exception of the Ethiopian Orthodox Church, the Eritrean Orthodox Church and the Concerned Members Internet Web Site........
Once again, MEN decided that Enoch and other books were not Scripture.
Quote
Share

Rocky
Rocky

January 9th, 2013, 1:30 am #50

"B" are you bragging or complaining?
Quote
Share