The Immaculate Conception Error

[valiant]

Originally Posted by valiant

what about the law written in the heart of ALL?

Then an infant would be able to reason and know the difference between right and wrong, conscientiously. But that's not the case.

Conscience does not work by reason. So your objection is invalid. A child knows right and wrong from its earliest years. I could give you illustrations from life.

I don't know, do you assume? Why try to label me - to distract from the quoted text? Take the text as it reads.

so you are a universalist?

All men have been saved "in Christ", but not all will accept this truth. For those who reject Christ they remain under law.

That is a contradiction in terms. If all men have been saved, then all men ARE saved, Salvation is not our work it is God's. Thus you are blatantly wrong. Only those who are truly saved are in Christ. You need to get your ideas sorted out.

Furthermore there are many who are not under the Law who yet still are unsaved.

There you go again.

If you carelessly give that impression then you deserve the title universalist.

 

[Roberth]

Conscience does not work by reason. So your objection is invalid. A child knows right and wrong from its earliest years. I could give you illustrations from life.

So you know when a child is morally obligated to God and His law? I hope the answer is, "No, I don't" because any other answer is presumptuous.

 

[Roberth]

That is a contradiction in terms. If all men have been saved, then all men ARE saved, Salvation is not our work it is God's. Thus you are blatantly wrong. Only those who are truly saved are in Christ. You need to get your ideas sorted out.

I said,

All men have been saved "in Christ", but not all will accept this truth. For those who reject Christ they remain under law.

Reread Rom 5:18. That's what it states.

Furthermore there are many who are not under the Law who yet still are unsaved.

Infants are not born under law. All who have reached the age of accountability and refuse Christ are under law. Who are you kidding?

 

[onlinebuddy]

Conscience does not work by reason. So your objection is invalid. A child knows right and wrong from its earliest years. I could give you illustrations from life.

Every human being, including babies, have consciences. However, the scope of a baby's conscience is not ultimate. It's just a basic ability. The conscience either develops or grows weak as a result of a person's understanding of Godly truths.

Conscience does not work by reason.

The conscience requires understanding, which babies and handicapped persons do not possess. Therefore their consciences cannot always lead them to God. One has to know (or possess knowledge and understanding of) the good that they ought to do (James 4:17) in order for their consciences to be considered as violated.

The same can be true of an adult in whom the Word of God is planted. If he does not understand the Word that was sown in his heart, it will be snatched away by the evil one[Mt 13:19]. That's why understanding is important. [Prov 4:7]

A child knows right and wrong from its earliest years.

A child has no knowledge of good or evil[Deut 1:39]. Although they have the basic knowledge to know right from wrong, they do not know enough for sin to be imputed to(counted against) them by God. Therefore God did not impute (consider, count, reckon) sin to them in Deut 1:39, and let them enter the promised land. So who are we to call them wicked?

Also, the conscience depends on the values imbibed in a individual. The conscience can become weak when one does not understand spiritual truths.[1 Cor 8:10] The conscience can become calloused (as seared with hot iron) due to continuous disobedience.[1 Tim 4:2] Those who violate their conscience end up shipwrecking their faith[1 Tim 1:19]

 

[tanakh]

“As it is written, there is none righteous, no, not one: For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God.” Romans 3: 10, 23

As I begin to debunk this erroneous doctrine of ‘the immaculate conception of Mary’, let me quickly submit that I’m not out for religious bashing. But rather, I’m out with a holy motive of love, to rescue some of our well-meaning, lovely brethren in the Lord. Who are inadvertently indoctrinated into this erroneous doctrine that is obviously very disastrous.

“The 8[SUP]th[/SUP] of December, 1854, Pope Pius IX was sitting on his throne; a triple crown of gold and diamonds was on his head: silk and damask- red and white vestments on his shoulders; five hundred mitred prelates were surrounding him; and more than fifty thousand people were at his feet in the incomparable St. Peter’s Church of Rome. After a few minutes of most solemn silence, a cardinal, dressed with his purple robe, left his seat, and gravely walked towards the pope, humbly prostrating himself at his feet, and said:

‘Holy Father, tell us if we can believe and teach that the Mother of God, the Holy Virgin Mary, was immaculate in her conception.’

The Supreme Pontiff answered: “I do not know; let us ask the light of the Holy Ghost.”
The cardinal withdrew; the Pope and the numberless multitude fell on their knees; and the harmonious choir sang the ‘Veni Creator Spiritus.’

The last note of the sacred hymn had hardly rolled under the vaults of the temple, when the same cardinal left his place, and again advanced towards the throne of the pontiff, prostrated himself at his feet, and said;

‘Holy Father, tell us if the Holy Mother of God, the Blessed Virgin Mary, was immaculate in her conception.’
The pope again answered: ‘I do not know; let us ask the light of the Holy Ghost.’

And again the ‘Veni Creator Spiritus’ was sung.

Again the eyes of the multitude followed the grave steps of the purple- robed cardinal for the third time to the throne of the successor of St. Peter, to ask again:

‘Holy Father, tell us if we can believe that the Blessed Virgin Mary, the Mother of God was immaculate.’
The pope, as if he had just received a direct communication from God, answered with a solemn voice:
‘Yes! We must believe that the Blessed Virgin Mary was immaculate in her conception… There is no salvation to those who do not believe this dogma!’

And, with a loud voice, the pope intoned the Te Deum; the bells of the three hundred churches of Rome rang; the cannons of the citadel were fired. The last act of the most ridiculous and sacrilegious comedy the world had ever seen, was over; the doors of heaven were forever shut against those who would refuse to believe the anti-scriptural doctrine that there is a daughter of Eve who has not inherited the sinful nature of Adam.

She was redeclared exempt when the God of Truth said, “There is none righteous; no, not one: for all have sinned!” (Rom. 3:10, 23).

No trace of this teaching is found in the first centuries of the Church.”

(50 Years in the “Church” of Rome, The Conversion of a Priest, by Charles Chiniquy, Chick publications, 1985, pp. 233-234 [c. 1886])

(As quoted in Rebecca Brown’s ‘Prepare For War’)

Dear brethren in the Lord, it is very clear that this doctrine of the immaculate conception of Mary, is unscriptural. The doctrine was enacted without consulting ‘The Book Of Truth’-The Holy Bible. And of course, the Holy Spirit does not speak against scriptural Truths.

We can’t afford to risk our salvation and faith on what man says. No matter his title, position or whatever. Like the Berea Fellows in the book of acts of the Apostle, when we receive an instruction, exhortation or doctrine from our teachers, we should be wise enough to compare them with scriptural truths (Acts 17:11).

Anybody can claim to have heard the Holy Spirit, but for us to be on the safest side, we must compare what we receive with the scriptures. I for one, I do not take everything I’m taught in Church, no matter who it is I received it from. If I compare, and it does not concur to scriptural truth, I discard it.

To this end, I often tell people that I listen to every sermon with filter in my ears. And that is including my present Pastor. Because I believe salvation is a personal race.

On the Day of Judgment, I can’t blame my failure on anyone but myself. Hence, The Lord Jesus said, we should be as wise as a serpent and harmless as a dove…

The scriptures admonishes us to worship God in spirit and Truth. We are commanded to walk in the Spirit. We’re are told that when the Holy Spirit comes, he’ll guide us into all truth. But particularly, Jesus says he will not speak of himself, but rather, he will take of mine, and show them to you. Jesus words are as entrenched in the word of God- the Bible.
Anything outside the written word of God, is definitely not from the Spirit of Jesus- The Holy Spirit.

To this end, the Apostle Paul says; anyone who preaches any other gospel, apart from the original gospel, let him be accursed—Gal 1:8.

Hence, to avoid the curse of God, we must confine ourselves to only scriptural truths.

It is my earnest prayer, that the Lord Jesus, will restructure your heart, and pull you out of this erroneous doctrine (if you’re involved) with this word in season in the Mighty Name of Jesus Christ!

Remain Blessed!

Emeke Odili

'The lovely brethren of the Lord' are in the main unlikely to appear on CC. I do not believe in the immaculate conception and very few if any other contributers do either. I wonder who taking into account the absence of Catholics your post and others like it are aimed at and why there is such an obsession in condemning the RC on a Protestant Evangelical website. Are you afraid we may all suddenly convert to Catholicism?

 

[valiant]

So you know when a child is morally obligated to God and His law? I hope the answer is, "No, I don't" because any other answer is presumptuous.

I know of cases were a child has felt under moral obligation and was aware at a very early age that she was doing wrong..

And that is to be morally obligated to God.

 

[valiant]

Reread Rom 5:18. That's what it states.

Romans 5.18 does not mention salvation. You are totally careless in dealing with Scriptural doctrine.

Infants are not born under law. All who have reached the age of accountability and refuse Christ are under law. Who are you kidding?

There is no such thing as the age of accountability. Babies are under the law from birth equally with any others..

 

[KJV1611]

Romans 5.18 does not mention salvation. You are totally careless in dealing with Scriptural doctrine.



There is no such thing as the age of accountability. Babies are under the law from birth equally with any others..

Here's the age of accountablity from the bible.

Romans 7:9 KJV
For I was alive without the law once: but when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died.

 

[valiant]

Every human being, including babies, have consciences. However, the scope of a baby's conscience is not ultimate. It's just a basic ability.

if it has conscience as a basic ability that is enough to condemn it.

The conscience either develops or grows weak as a result of a person's understanding of Godly truths.

sooooo?

The conscience requires understanding, which babies and handicapped persons do not possess.

how can you possibly know what conscience 'requires'?

Therefore their consciences cannot always lead them to God.

they are probably aware of God from birth.

One has to know (or possess knowledge and understanding of) the good that they ought to do (James 4:17) in order for their consciences to be considered as violated.

how can you possibly deny that they do know?

The same can be true of an adult in whom the Word of God is planted. If he does not understand the Word that was sown in his heart, it will be snatched away by the evil one[Mt 13:19]. That's why understanding is important. [Prov 4:7]

you have destroyed your own case. You have greed that conscience without understanding condemns.

A child has no knowledge of good or evil[Deut 1:39].

Of course it has. the 'little ones' God was speaking of were up to 20 lol It was merely saying that they were not old enough to judge that particular situation as to whether to enter the land.

Although they have the basic knowledge to know right from wrong, they do not know enough for sin to be imputed to(counted against) them by God

.

I am amazed that you have such confident knowledge about something that no one else with any sense would be dogmatic about. Do you tell God what to do?

Therefore God did not impute (consider, count, reckon) sin to them in Deut 1:39, and let them enter the promised land. So who are we to call them wicked?

THey died didn't they? LOL There was only ONE sin He did not account to them.

Also, the conscience depends on the values imbibed in a individual. The conscience can become weak when one does not understand spiritual truths.[1 Cor 8:10] The conscience can become calloused (as seared with hot iron) due to continuous disobedience.[1 Tim 4:2]

so the consciences of babies can be seared as with a hot iron? interesting lol

Those who violate their conscience end up shipwrecking their faith[1 Tim 1:19]

I'm not sure what this has to do with infancy conscience. but no doubt you have?

you are talking through your hat.

 

[Cassian]

valiant,

Romans 5.18 does not mention salvation. You are totally careless in dealing with Scriptural doctrine.

You are correct it does not use the words, but it is definitely salvation. It is one, the major aspect of our salvation. Christ gave life to all men because of the condemnation of death given to all men in Rom 5:12. It is salvation from death. The other part of the atonement is salvation from sin. That is the one-time sacrifice for sin.

Salvation is all of God through Christ. It is universal since the fall was universal. Christ reconciled the world to God. II Cor 5:18-19. The two texts that summarize the atonement are I John 2:2, and Heb 2:9.

 

[Adamb12]

I found out why 99% of christians dont know how the bible was put together. When I say put together, I mean how the 66 books were chosen out of 180+ books, letters,etc., and how they were orderred from Genisis to Revelations as well. The answer is so demoralizing. Why would God choose the Pope to be in charge of this project, and why didnt they show their work on why they felt God told them to pic this book and put it here? Can anyone help?

 

[Cassian]

I found out why 99% of christians dont know how the bible was put together. When I say put together, I mean how the 66 books were chosen out of 180+ books, letters,etc., and how they were orderred from Genisis to Revelations as well. The answer is so demoralizing. Why would God choose the Pope to be in charge of this project, and why didnt they show their work on why they felt God told them to pic this book and put it here? Can anyone help?

I think you should do a restudy. The Pope had NOTHING to do with the canonization of the Bible.

 

[Adamb12]

The pope of Alexandria at that time was Athanasius aka the immortal one. He helped Constantine create the 66 books. Why didnt they show their work on how they chose the 66, and how the Spirit told them where to put each one in order? Most Sunday Services dont talk about how the 66 books were chosen. Jew first? Every knee will bow? Slaves obey your masters? It doesnt sound loving to me. Would Love send all the millions of children who lived in South and North America and all the other continents that had no idea about the Torah and Jesus to hell, cuz the only way to the father is thru the son? Sounds demanding to me. Seek first, then test secound whether or not the words are from the Spirit of Love right?

 

[epostle]

I found out why 99% of christians dont know how the bible was put together. When I say put together, I mean how the 66 books were chosen out of 180+ books, letters,etc., and how they were orderred from Genisis to Revelations as well. The answer is so demoralizing. Why would God choose the Pope to be in charge of this project, and why didnt they show their work on why they felt God told them to pic this book and put it here? Can anyone help?

Truth should be illuminating, not demoralizing. Inspiration of the holy books had to be proven, not just assumed. It took 300 years and 4 councils and was a complicated process.
First it has to be proven that an authoritative hierarchical church exists to put together a bible in the first place. That is another topic.
The criteria for proving inspiration is another topic.
The difference between enscripturation (when they were written) and canonization (universally binding on all Christians) is another topic.
The 73 books of the bible listed by the North African councils in 397 AD as opposed to Martin Luther's 66 books is another topic.
The function of the Pope together with the College of Bishops to settle doctrinal matters (i.e. putting together a bible) is no different than the structure found at the Council of Jerusalem in the book of Acts, again, another topic.

To focus on your question, the Pope was not "in charge of this project" by himself. The Catholic Church over 3 centuries and 4 councils had accumulated what was believed to be inspired books, with many heated debates in the process. Athanasius first lists our present 27 New Testament books as such in 367. Disputes still persist concerning several books, almost right up until 397, when the Canon is authoritatively closed.

What was closed by the local councils had to be sent to Rome where the list of books was made official Church teaching by Pope Damasus in 418 AD.

Some theories on bible origins are based on conjecture, not facts, for the purpose of undermining Church authority.

 

[Adamb12]

Daaaaang! Nice job brutha! Seriously, that was awesome to read. Your reasons for writing that might be a little different, im not sure tho, i guess you were saying no..that the Pope of Alexandria aka Athanasius aka the immortal one, did not choose the books and order them? Its not worth arguing about thats for sure. Its my first day on here and ive read so many of all your guys conversations about all kinds of biblical stuff, and im saddened that we are like arguing kids on here. That means me too. Sorry, for asking questions that make you want to say that my pops is the devil, and that you say i said the God is not Loving. I never would say that. I just feel that the book was put together by the leader of the world and the things that they say the Spirit of Love has done, like telling Joshua to kill all the women and children in all those other villages or lands sounds unloving to me, and saying that redemption is to the jew first then the gentile sounds unloving to me, saying the beginning of wisdom is fear of Love sounds unloving to me, A father willingly sacrificing his own son, sounds like the pagan worship of marduk, where fathers would willingly sacrifice their firstborn sons. Syncretism was the norm for new rulers of conquered lands. The conquered nation would need to comply with the new rulers religion. If not, the new rulers would loose more taxable income, the conquered people. So, wise enconmists that the Roman empire had at that time suggested syncretism to Constantine and thus we have the council of Nicaea. Thats all. Love ya, nite.

 

[epostle]

The pope of Alexandria at that time was Athanasius aka the immortal one. He helped Constantine create the 66 books. Why didnt they show their work on how they chose the 66, and how the Spirit told them where to put each one in order? Most Sunday Services dont talk about how the 66 books were chosen. Jew first? Every knee will bow? Slaves obey your masters? It doesnt sound loving to me. Would Love send all the millions of children who lived in South and North America and all the other continents that had no idea about the Torah and Jesus to hell, cuz the only way to the father is thru the son? Sounds demanding to me. Seek first, then test secound whether or not the words are from the Spirit of Love right?

Athanasius was bishop of Alexandria, never a pope.
He was called "Father of Orthodoxy", never the immortal one.
Constantine had no spiritual jurisdiction. He participated on no decisions of the Church. He ran the government, not the Church.
There were always 73 books in the Bible until Martin Luther threw out 7 books because they did not suit his opinions.
Slavery in the Bible is not the same as slavery the way we know it.
No one goes to hell for not hearing the Gospel.

Your post has too many topics in it, it's hard to give a good answer for each one.

​

 

[Magenta]

There were always 73 books in the Bible until Martin Luther threw out 7 books because they did not suit his opinions.

Roman Catholics have twisted history to suit their biased opinions.

Reasons why the Apocrypha does NOT belong in the Bible!

 

[epostle]

Reasons Why Funnymentalist Bible.crap is False

Matt. 2:16 - Herod's decree of slaying innocent children was prophesied in Wis. 11:7 - slaying the holy innocents.
Matt. 6:19-20 - Jesus' statement about laying up for yourselves treasure in heaven follows Sirach 29:11 - lay up your treasure.
Matt.. 7:12 - Jesus' golden rule "do unto others" is the converse of Tobit 4:15 - what you hate, do not do to others.
Matt. 7:16,20 - Jesus' statement "you will know them by their fruits" follows Sirach 27:6 - the fruit discloses the cultivation.
Matt. 9:36 - the people were "like sheep without a shepherd" is same as Judith 11:19 - sheep without a shepherd.
Matt. 11:25 - Jesus' description "Lord of heaven and earth" is the same as Tobit 7:18 - Lord of heaven and earth.
Matt. 12:42 - Jesus refers to the wisdom of Solomon which was recorded and made part of the deuterocanonical books.
Matt. 16:18 - Jesus' reference to the "power of death" and "gates of Hades" references Wisdom 16:13.
Matt. 22:25; Mark 12:20; Luke 20:29 - Gospel writers refer to the canonicity of Tobit 3:8 and 7:11 regarding the seven brothers.
Matt. 24:15 - the "desolating sacrilege" Jesus refers to is also taken from 1 Macc. 1:54 and 2 Macc. 8:17.
Matt. 24:16 - let those "flee to the mountains" is taken from 1 Macc. 2:28.
Matt. 27:43 - if He is God's Son, let God deliver him from His adversaries follows Wisdom 2:18.
Mark 4:5,16-17 - Jesus' description of seeds falling on rocky ground and having no root follows Sirach 40:15.
Mark 9:48 - description of hell where their worm does not die and the fire is not quenched references Judith 16:17.
Luke 1:42 - Elizabeth's declaration of Mary's blessedness above all women follows Uzziah's declaration in Judith 13:18.
Luke 1:52 - Mary's magnificat addressing the mighty falling from their thrones and replaced by lowly follows Sirach 10:14.
Luke 2:29 - Simeon's declaration that he is ready to die after seeing the Child Jesus follows Tobit 11:9.
Luke 13:29 - the Lord's description of men coming from east and west to rejoice in God follows Baruch 4:37.
Luke 21:24 - Jesus' usage of "fall by the edge of the sword" follows Sirach 28:18.
Luke 24:4 and Acts 1:10 - Luke's description of the two men in dazzling apparel reminds us of 2 Macc. 3:26.
John 1:3 - all things were made through Him, the Word, follows Wisdom 9:1.
John 3:13 - who has ascended into heaven but He who descended from heaven references Baruch 3:29.
John 4:48; Acts 5:12; 15:12; 2 Cor. 12:12 - Jesus', Luke's and Paul's usage of "signs and wonders" follows Wisdom 8:8.
John 5:18 - Jesus claiming that God is His Father follows Wisdom 2:16.
John 6:35-59 - Jesus' Eucharistic discourse is foreshadowed in Sirach 24:21.
John 10:22 - the identification of the feast of the dedication is taken from 1 Macc. 4:59.
John 10:36 – Jesus accepts the inspiration of Maccabees as He analogizes the Hanukkah consecration to His own consecration to the Father in 1 Macc. 4:36.
John 15:6 - branches that don't bear fruit and are cut down follows Wis. 4:5 where branches are broken off.
Acts 1:15 - Luke's reference to the 120 may be a reference to 1 Macc. 3:55 - leaders of tens / restoration of the twelve.
Acts 10:34; Rom. 2:11; Gal. 2:6 - Peter's and Paul's statement that God shows no partiality references Sirach 35:12.
Acts 17:29 - description of false gods as like gold and silver made by men follows Wisdom 13:10.
Rom 1:18-25 - Paul's teaching on the knowledge of the Creator and the ignorance and sin of idolatry follows Wis. 13:1-10.
Rom. 1:20 - specifically, God's existence being evident in nature follows Wis. 13:1.
Rom. 1:23 - the sin of worshipping mortal man, birds, animals and reptiles follows Wis. 11:15; 12:24-27; 13:10; 14:8.
Rom. 1:24-27 - this idolatry results in all kinds of sexual perversion which follows Wis. 14:12,24-27.
Rom. 4:17 - Abraham is a father of many nations follows Sirach 44:19.
Rom. 5:12 - description of death and sin entering into the world is similar to Wisdom 2:24.
Rom. 9:21 - usage of the potter and the clay, making two kinds of vessels follows Wisdom 15:7.
1 Cor. 2:16 - Paul's question, "who has known the mind of the Lord?" references Wisdom 9:13.
1 Cor. 6:12-13; 10:23-26 - warning that, while all things are good, beware of gluttony, follows Sirach 36:18 and 37:28-30.
1 Cor. 8:5-6 - Paul acknowledging many "gods" but one Lord follows Wis. 13:3.
1 Cor. 10:1 - Paul's description of our fathers being under the cloud passing through the sea refers to Wisdom 19:7.
1 Cor. 10:20 - what pagans sacrifice they offer to demons and not to God refers to Baruch 4:7.
1 Cor. 15:29 - if no expectation of resurrection, it would be foolish to be baptized on their behalf follows 2 Macc. 12:43-45.
Eph. 1:17 - Paul's prayer for a "spirit of wisdom" follows the prayer for the spirit of wisdom in Wisdom 7:7.
Eph. 6:14 - Paul describing the breastplate of righteousness is the same as Wis. 5:18. See also Isaiah 59:17 and 1 Thess. 5:8.
Eph. 6:13-17 - in fact, the whole discussion of armor, helmet, breastplate, sword, shield follows Wis. 5:17-20.
1 Tim. 6:15 - Paul's description of God as Sovereign and King of kings is from 2 Macc. 12:15; 13:4.
2 Tim. 4:8 - Paul's description of a crown of righteousness is similar to Wisdom 5:16.
Heb. 4:12 - Paul's description of God's word as a sword is similar to Wisdom 18:15.
Heb. 11:5 - Enoch being taken up is also referenced in Wis 4:10 and Sir 44:16. See also 2 Kings 2:1-13 & Sir 48:9 regarding Elijah.
Heb 11:35 - Paul teaches about the martyrdom of the mother and her sons described in 2 Macc. 7:1-42.
Heb. 12:12 - the description "drooping hands" and "weak knees" comes from Sirach 25:23.
James 1:19 - let every man be quick to hear and slow to respond follows Sirach 5:11.
James 2:23 - it was reckoned to him as righteousness follows 1 Macc. 2:52 - it was reckoned to him as righteousness.
James 3:13 - James' instruction to perform works in meekness follows Sirach 3:17.
James 5:3 - describing silver which rusts and laying up treasure follows Sirach 29:10-11.
James 5:6 - condemning and killing the "righteous man" follows Wisdom 2:10-20.
1 Peter 1:6-7 - Peter teaches about testing faith by purgatorial fire as described in Wisdom 3:5-6 and Sirach 2:5.
1 Peter 1:17 - God judging each one according to his deeds refers to Sirach 16:12 - God judges man according to his deeds.
2 Peter 2:7 - God's rescue of a righteous man (Lot) is also described in Wisdom 10:6.
Rev. 1:4 – the seven spirits who are before his throne is taken from Tobit 12:15 – Raphael is one of the seven holy angels who present the prayers of the saints before the Holy One.
Rev. 1:18; Matt. 16:18 - power of life over death and gates of Hades follows Wis. 16:13.
Rev. 2:12 - reference to the two-edged sword is similar to the description of God's Word in Wisdom 18:16.
Rev. 5:7 - God is described as seated on His throne, and this is the same description used in Sirach 1:8.
Rev. 8:3-4 - prayers of the saints presented to God by the hand of an angel follows Tobit 12:12,15.
Rev. 8:7 - raining of hail and fire to the earth follows Wisdom 16:22 and Sirach 39:29.
Rev. 9:3 - raining of locusts on the earth follows Wisdom 16:9.
Rev. 11:19 - the vision of the ark of the covenant (Mary) in a cloud of glory was prophesied in 2 Macc. 2:7.
Rev. 17:14 - description of God as King of kings follows 2 Macc. 13:4.
Rev. 19:1 - the cry "Hallelujah" at the coming of the new Jerusalem follows Tobit 13:18.
Rev. 19:11 - the description of the Lord on a white horse in the heavens follows 2 Macc. 3:25; 11:8.
Rev. 19:16 - description of our Lord as King of kings is taken from 2 Macc. 13:4.
Rev. 21:19 - the description of the new Jerusalem with precious stones is prophesied in Tobit 13:17.
Exodus 23:7 - do not slay the innocent and righteous - Dan. 13:53 - do not put to death an innocent and righteous person.
1 Sam. 28:7-20 – the intercessory mediation of deceased Samuel for Saul follows Sirach 46:20.
2 Kings 2:1-13 – Elijah being taken up into heaven follows Sirach 48:9.

2 Tim. 3:16 - the inspired Scripture that Paul was referring to included the deuterocanonical texts that the Protestants removed. The books Baruch, Tobit, Maccabees, Judith, Sirach, Wisdom and parts of Daniel and Esther were all included in the Septuagint that Jesus and the apostles used.

Sirach and 2 Maccabees – some Protestants argue these books are not inspired because the writers express uncertainty about their abilities. But sacred writers are often humble about their divinely inspired writings. See, for example, 1 Cor. 7:40 – Paul says he “thinks” that he has the Spirit of God.

The Protestants attempt to defend their rejection of the deuterocanonicals on the ground that the early Jews rejected them. However, the Jewish councils that rejected them (e.g., School of Javneh (also called “Jamnia” in 90 - 100 A.D.) were the same councils that rejected the entire New Testatment canon. Thus, Protestants who reject the Catholic Bible are following a Jewish council that rejected Christ and the Revelation of the New Testament.

 

[valiant]

valiant,

You are correct it does not use the words, but it is definitely salvation. It is one, the major aspect of our salvation.

What a small idea about salvation you have. Justification is certainly an aspect of salvation, but it is only the commencement. Salvation involves the deliverance of the whole man.

Christ gave life to all men because of the condemnation of death given to all men in Rom 5:12.

Christ did not give life to all men. He OFFERED life to all men. Only those who believe and experience that life will be saved.

It is salvation from death. The other part of the atonement is salvation from sin. That is the one-time sacrifice for sin.

And is appropriated only by those who believe in Him for salvation.

Salvation is all of God through Christ.

That is the one true thing you have said, but you then spoil it.

It is universal since the fall was universal.

Nowhere in Scripture is salvation depicted as universal. Scripture is quite clear on the fact that the majority will perish. Only those who come to Christ for salvation will be saved.

Christ reconciled the world to God. II Cor 5:18-19.

And committed to US the ministry of reconciliation. If all the world was reconciled there would be no need of a ministry of reconciliation. All that means (and it is a wonderful all) is that Jesus Christ has made reconciliation available to all if they will receive it. You greatly ERR.

The two texts that summarize the atonement are I John 2:2, and Heb 2:9.

LOL and ignore ALL the others? That is what you heretics do. But now at last the truth about you is laid bare. YOU ARE A UNIVERSALIST. No wonder you will not accept that we are all born sinners.

Jesus Christ is the propitiation for the sins of the whole world. Through His death He has opened up the possibility of salvation for the whole world. God has been propitiated for the world's sin. That is why He can allow us to live. But that propitiation does not apply to us INDIVIDUALLY unless we receive it. Remember that John went on to say, 'HE WHO HAS THE SON HAS LIFE, HE WHO DOES NOT HAVE THE SON DOES NOT HAVE LIFE.

Again he says, 'we know that we have passed from death to life because we love the brotherhood'. THUS OTHERS HAD NOT PASSED FROM DEATH TO LIFE. Indeed he calls them 'children of the Devil'.

As to Heb 2.9 Jesus did taste death for every man. But it is only as each one appropriates that death for himself through faith that he is saved. As he said, 'how shall we escape if we neglect such a great salvation?'

He only 'saves to the uttermost' those who come to God through Him.(7.25). The whole of Hebrews in fact lays the choice before men whether they will believe or not. See 10.26 ff. And he adds, 'we are not of those who shrink back into destruction, but of those who believe to the saving of our souls' (10.39). Thus it is clear that many will be destroyed, because, although He tasted death for them, they rejected His offer of salvation.

 

[valiant]

Reasons Why Fundamentalist Bible.crap is False

Let's look at one or two shall we? I won't go through them all because my time is valuable, not to be wasted on this nonsense.

Matt. 2:16 - Herod's decree of slaying innocent children was prophesied in Wis. 11:7 - slaying the holy innocents.

Wisdom 11.7 was talking about the children slain by the Egyptians in the time of Moses. So how is it a prophecy of what happened at Bethlehem?

Matt. 6:19-20 - Jesus' statement about laying up for yourselves treasure in heaven follows Sirach 29:11 - lay up your treasure.

But Sirach 29.11 says, 'bestow your treasures according to the commandments of the Most High.' It is NOTHING LIKE Matt 6.19-20. So you are LYING.

Matt.. 7:12 - Jesus' golden rule "do unto others" is the converse of Tobit 4:15 - what you hate, do not do to others.

Tobit's statement is found in Greek philosophers and was also made by Hillel. It was ONLY Jesus Who made it a positive statement of action.

Matt. 7:16,20 - Jesus' statement "you will know them by their fruits" follows Sirach 27:6 - the fruit discloses the cultivation.

Sirach is saying that the fruit shows what husbandry has been carried out. That is very different from 'by their fruits you will know them.'

Matt. 9:36 - the people were "like sheep without a shepherd" is same as Judith 11:19 - sheep without a shepherd.

I wonder where Judith got it from? Try Numbers 27.17. So Jesus was citing Numbers (as Judith was as well)

Matt. 11:25 - Jesus' description "Lord of heaven and earth" is the same as Tobit 7:18 - Lord of heaven and earth.

Who both got it from Psalm 115.15. Besides we have no evidence that Jesus had read the Book of Tobit.

Matt. 12:42 - Jesus refers to the wisdom of Solomon which was recorded and made part of the deuterocanonical books.

Jesus referred to the R EAL wisdom of Solomon, not to the title of a book, as the verses in question make clear. You really are scraping the bottom of the barrel.
.

Matt. 22:25; Mark 12:20; Luke 20:29 - Gospel writers refer to the canonicity of Tobit 3:8 and 7:11 regarding the seven brothers.

there is no similarity at all between the three accounts. you are just showing your desperation.

Matt. 24:15 - the "desolating sacrilege" Jesus refers to is also taken from 1 Macc. 1:54 and 2 Macc. 8:17.

Funny and I thought it was from Daniel which Jesus actually STATED.

Matt. 24:16 - let those "flee to the mountains" is taken from 1 Macc. 2:28.

LOL they are nothing at all like each other. all Maccabees says is that the brothers fled into the mountains for refuge. that was the natural place to go

I think I have wasted enough time on this nonsense!!!