Last Will and Testament of God

[Terrywoodenpic]

Go ahead and write down the pertinent answers and questions, and we will look at them.

I gave the answers and asked a question.
I am waiting for your reply

 

[Kemosloby]

I gave the answers and asked a question.
I am waiting for your reply

No, all you did is use the Catholic Didache to try and discredit the Bible. Does the Didache have any questions or answers pertaining to this thread, Christ on the cross executing a will and testament?

Yes the didache is a Catholic book. I looked for it online and it is described as Catholic catechisms. Simply because it's old doesn't mean it's good. The Apostles were constantly fighting false apostles, even from the beginning, surely once the Apostles were gone there was nothing to prevent these people. We must stick to the scriptures.

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

There wasn't a wedding feast without the Gospel of John.

Yeshua drank wine at a few occasions, as they called him a winebibber for it; yet as he said wisdom is justified by her children (Matthew 11:19)....

A Nazarite (Numbers 6:3 & Amos 2:12), princes, and kings shouldn't drink least they distort the Law (Proverbs 31:4-7)...

The wise shouldn't drink (Proverbs 20:1) and Yeshua said he would appoint those drinking with the hypocrites (Luke 12:45-46).

It doesn't need to, the rest of the scriptures declare it as wrong, and one of the reasons Israel/Judah was cut off.

Isaiah 56:11-12 Yes, the dogs are greedy. They can never have enough. They are shepherds who can’t understand. They have all turned to their own way, each one to his gain, from every quarter. (12) “Come,” say they, “I will get wine, and we will fill ourselves with strong drink; and tomorrow will be as today, great beyond measure.”

I can hardly see any connection at all, even by using the widest interpretation and bending of contexts.
There is certainly some more definite instruction, not to drink in excess and in some specific situations.
But certainly not a general embargo on wine.

The old Testament blows hot and cold on the issue, and the Jews had no problem with wine.

Jesus and the disciples drank wine offered by Jesus at the last supper, one of the seminal events ever recorded in the Bible.

On a personal note, I rarely drink alcohol, not that I have anything against it as my doctors say I should drink more, as it would help to control my age related " essential and intent tremors".
However, I restrict wine to the occasion of my weekly Eucharist.

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

No, all you did is use the Catholic Didache to try and discredit the Bible. Does the Didache have any questions or answers pertaining to this thread, Christ on the cross executing a will and testament?

Yes the didache is a Catholic book. I looked for it online and it is described as Catholic catechisms. Simply because it's old doesn't mean it's good. The Apostles were constantly fighting false apostles, even from the beginning, surely once the Apostles were gone there was nothing to prevent these people. We must stick to the scriptures.

You have a knack of abusing the truth and coming to incorrect assumptions.
I repeat the Didache pre dates the formation of the Catholic Church. indeed they only knew of references to it, prior to the re-discover in 1873.
It is not part of their Catechism. and few catholic congregations even know of its existence.
It is only included in the Ethopian Orthodox Canon. not the Catholic. Though they now recognise its importance as do virtually all other churches.

It was never disputed by the Apostles. and is also known by the title The Teaching of the Twelve Apostles' which many believe was applied to it rather later, by the church fathers. It contents never have been in dispute. But rather overtaken by later developments in the church.

Old, certainly does not mean good it means OLD. The Didache was in circulation and in use at the time of the apostles and is contemporary with Paul's Letters and predates the publication of the Gospels .. But it was originally an oral tradition like all Christian scripture., as there were no established Christian texts at the time, Like other works, It was not written down till the mid first century.

What you find online Does not necessarily mean correct, I gave you some accurate Links which give a balanced view on the Didache, and an accurate translation that is not in dispute.

 

[Kemosloby]

You have a knack of abusing the truth and coming to incorrect assumptions.
I repeat the Didache pre dates the formation of the Catholic Church. indeed they only knew of references to it, prior to the re-discover in 1873.
It is not part of their Catechism. and few catholic congregations even know of its existence.
It is only included in the Ethopian Erthodox Canon. not the Catholic. Though they now recognise its importance as do virtually all other churches.

It was never disputed by the Apostles. and is also known by the title The Teaching of the Twelve Apostles' which many believe was applied to it rather later, by the church fathers. It contents never have been in dispute. But rather overtaken by later developments in the church.

Old, certainly does not mean good it means OLD. The Didache was in circulation and in use at the time of the apostles and is contemporary with Paul's Letters and predates the publication of the Gospels .. But it was originally an oral tradition like all Christian scripture., as there were no established Christian texts at the time, Like other works, It was not written down till the mid first century.

What you find online Does not necessarily mean correct, I gave you some accurate Links which give a balanced view on the Didache, and an accurate translation that is not in dispute.

Well going by the Gospel and not the Didache, the crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus carried more of the conversation.

Do you have anything from your didache that pertains to this thread? A quote or something?

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

No, all you did is use the Catholic Didache to try and discredit the Bible. Does the Didache have any questions or answers pertaining to this thread, Christ on the cross executing a will and testament?

Yes the didache is a Catholic book. I looked for it online and it is described as Catholic catechisms. Simply because it's old doesn't mean it's good. The Apostles were constantly fighting false apostles, even from the beginning, surely once the Apostles were gone there was nothing to prevent these people. We must stick to the scriptures.

The Catholics do Use the Word Didache (Teaching) in the title of their book "The Didache Bible" this is a commentary on the Bible, in accordance with their Catachism.

It has no relationship and shares nothing with the ancient Didache (the teaching of the twelve apostles)
This shows the dangers and ignorance of using Google unwisely.
If I had meant "Didache Bible" I would have said so.

 

[Kemosloby]

You have a knack of abusing the truth and coming to incorrect assumptions.
I repeat the Didache pre dates the formation of the Catholic Church. indeed they only knew of references to it, prior to the re-discover in 1873.
It is not part of their Catechism. and few catholic congregations even know of its existence.
It is only included in the Ethopian Orthodox Canon. not the Catholic. Though they now recognise its importance as do virtually all other churches.

It was never disputed by the Apostles. and is also known by the title The Teaching of the Twelve Apostles' which many believe was applied to it rather later, by the church fathers. It contents never have been in dispute. But rather overtaken by later developments in the church.

Old, certainly does not mean good it means OLD. The Didache was in circulation and in use at the time of the apostles and is contemporary with Paul's Letters and predates the publication of the Gospels .. But it was originally an oral tradition like all Christian scripture., as there were no established Christian texts at the time, Like other works, It was not written down till the mid first century.

What you find online Does not necessarily mean correct, I gave you some accurate Links which give a balanced view on the Didache, and an accurate translation that is not in dispute.

Enough Catholics know to have published a book on it. But yes the book is a Catholic commentary on the didache based on Catholic catchecisms. Not that the didache was a catholic creation. I admit I had that wrong, but today is the first ive heard of a Didache. But the Gospels are scripture and the Didache is not. You said it yourself. So what is your point? Do you say the Didache is superior to the Bible?

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

Well going by the Gospel and not the Didache, the crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus carried more of the conversation.

Do you have anything from your didache that pertains to this thread? A quote or something?

It is not My Didache....

As you have accepted nothing I have offered so far...
so to use a biblical metaphor it is not profitable to "Throw pearls before Swine"
I will add comments as they apply.

 

[Kemosloby]

It is not My Didache....

As you have accepted nothing I have offered so far...
so to use a biblical metaphor it is not profitable to "Throw pearls before Swine"
I will add comments as they apply.

Do you own a Didache? Have you read a Didache?

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

Enough Catholics know to have published a book on it. But yes the book is a Catholic commentary on the didache based on Catholic catchecisms. Not that the didache was a catholic creation. I admit I had that wrong, but today is the first ive heard of a Didache. But the Gospels are scripture and the Didache is not. You said it yourself. So what is your point? Do you say the Didache is superior to the Bible?

Read my post #46

You are still confusing two entirely different books.

Get your head together and we might have something to discuss.

 

[Kemosloby]

Read my post #46

You are still confusing two entirely different books.

Get your head together and we might have something to discuss.

We're on the same page, I posted mine at the same time you posted yours. The book i saw is a Catholic commentary on the Didache based on Catholic catechisms. We throw that away.

Do you have a Didache to read for yourself?

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

Do you own a Didache? Have you read a Didache?

I have read Two books on the Didache each containing the Original document and English translation plus observation and commentary. I have Aarons book on the shelf in front of me now, with my Bibles and other religious books.
It would be perhaps better for you to read it your self before discussing it.

I have given copies to a number of local Anglican priests as none had previously read it, but only heard of it in seminary. All have found what it says, and the context in which it says it, very interesting.
One actually uses some of its wording in the Eucharist now.

 

[Kemosloby]

It sounds interesting, I can't tell what it is without reading it. But as an instruction manual it may be silent on things which the Gospels cover so not to cover the same ground.

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

We're on the same page, I posted mine at the same time you posted yours. The book i saw is a Catholic commentary on the Didache based on Catholic catechisms. We throw that away.

Do you have a Didache to read for yourself?

Yes I do have a copy and have studied it.

What you probably found was a reference to this linked book ... Didache Bible
which I have no particular reason to read. It is not a commentary on the Didache It is a teaching aid on the Bible ( teaching 'aid' = didache)

On second thoughts.... it looks quite an interesting way to learn how Catholics understand the Bible.
so I might get a copy.

 

[Kemosloby]

Yes I do have a copy and have studied it.

What you probably found was a reference to this linked book ...
which I have no particular reason to read. It is not a commentary on the Didache It is a teaching aid on the Bible ( teaching 'aid' = didache)

Didache Bible

Yeah thats it. The Didache Bible with Commentaries Based on Catechism of the Catholic Church

 

[Kemosloby]

Yes I do have a copy and have studied it.

What you probably found was a reference to this linked book ... Didache Bible
which I have no particular reason to read. It is not a commentary on the Didache It is a teaching aid on the Bible ( teaching 'aid' = didache)

On second thoughts.... it looks quite an interesting way to learn how Catholics understand the Bible.
so I might get a copy.

I won't get it. The didache contradicts the scriptures "not by a written code but by the spirit"...I'll stick with the real Bible.

 

[Electus de Lumine]

To my children who love me, you shall inherit the Kingdom of God.

Why did Jesus have to die?

Hebrews 9:15 Christ is the mediator of a new covenant, that those who are called may receive the promised eternal inheritance--now that he has died as a ransom to set them free from the sins committed under the first covenant. Hebrews 9:16 In the case of a will, it is necessary to establish the death of the one who made it,

A will does not take effect until somebody dies. Jesus was executing a will.

Why did Yahweh demand a brutal blood sacrifice?

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

It sounds interesting, I can't tell what it is without reading it. But as an instruction manual it may be silent on things which the Gospels cover so not to cover the same ground.

It only covers the Gospels by implication...For instance if you read any reference in the Bible on the Eucharist (Last supper) you have no concept of how they actually celebrated it.
By reading the Didache you read the actual words they used. what was required of them before they could take part... see the snippet of the translation in my earlier post. However it says nothing at all about the actual Last supper itself, It is not a Gospel, it is an instruction manual.

The words it uses show conclusively, that they made no connection at all between the Eucharist and the body and blood of Christ. that was a new idea introduced later when the Gospels were written.

To take part at all, it was necessary to have been baptised, repented and fasted.
apart from Baptism and daily periods of prayer the Eucharist was their only communal service.

 

[Kemosloby]

It only covers the Gospels by implication...For instance if you read any reference in the Bible on the Eucharist (Last supper) you have no concept of how they actually celebrated it.
By reading the Didache you read the actual words they used. what was required of them before they could take part... see the snippet of the translation in my earlier post. However it says nothing at all about the actual Last supper itself, It is not a Gospel, it is an instruction manual.

The words it uses show conclusively, that they made no connection at all between the Eucharist and the body and blood of Christ. that was a new idea introduced later when the Gospels were written.

To take part at all, it was necessary to have been baptised, repented and fasted.
apart from Baptism and daily periods of prayer the Eucharist was their only communal service.

An instruction manual contradicts scripture which says " But now, by dying to what once bound us, we have been released from the law so that we serve in the new way of the Spirit, and not in the old way of the written code."

And the casual, 'wing it' nature of scriptures shows they didnt have an official instruction manual. Or it would have sounded like the old testament where the Lord laid out every small detail of worship and feasts to the Israelites as part of scripture.

 

[Terrywoodenpic]

I won't get it. The didache contradicts the scriptures "not by a written code but by the spirit"...I'll stick with the real Bible.

Nothing wrong with finding contradictions with the Bible as we know it now. It will not become less true in meaning. How people have interpret what is says has always changed. It even changes with the language it is translated into. I currently use the New Revised Stand Version (English) edition.
two editions are needed, because English and American often mean quite different things when using the same words and phrases.

It is important to know what the earliest Christians were taught by Jesus, and what they believed and taught converts... after all we are the result of that chain of belief.