Can someone show me the evidence of the bullshit bible articles?

[I believe in Harry Potter]

Moderator Notice
link removed due to 30/30 violation

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

Oh okay thanks, if you can find any more drop them here as well

BrianSoddingBoru4 yeah sorry i couldnt find any on Google and i was too lazy to go through every google page in existance because they where all written by religious journal sites and didnt really give me anything that i wanted but like Egodeath said i think DuckDuckGo could be better idk never tried it so far

You couldn't find commentary on the Orthodox Bible on Google?  Seriously? Did you use your computer for this, or just stand outside and shout 'GOOGLE!'?

Boru

[I believe in Harry Potter]

Question:
Do Catholics and the Eastern Orthodox have the same canon of Scripture?
Answer:
No, the Eastern Orthodox have a slightly different canon of Scripture. Everything in the Catholic canon is included in the Eastern Orthodox canon, but they have some additional parts:

3 & 4 Maccabees
Psalm 151
The Prayer of Manasseh in Chronicles
1 Esdras
The reason for this is that while the New Testament canon was essentially universally agreed upon by the fourth century, minor variations in the Old Testament persisted through the Great Schism (c. 1054). These differences, as you can see, were relatively minor and nothing close to the later difference between the Protestant Old Testament and the Catholic/Orthodox Old Testament.


Another reason for the difference is that the Eastern Orthodox do not hold the same legalism as the Catholic Church when it comes to inspiration and canonical status. For them, it is a bit more fluid of an understanding; canonical simply means that something is acceptable to be read in liturgy. Even today there are some slight differences between the Eastern Orthodox Churches in regard to what each Church considers canonical (i.e. to be used in liturgy). For example, some Eastern Orthodox Churches do not read from the book of Revelation at divine liturgy. Hence they would not call it canonical, but they would still consider it to be divinely inspired and morally binding. In this fluid approach the Eastern Orthodox are very similar to ancient Judaism.

In Western Christianity the Catholic Church makes no distinction between canonical and inspired. We also have with exactness defined what books and parts of books we accept. In eastern Christianity the Orthodox Churches have have not made such exact definitions and see the differences amongst themselves as so minor as to not require any further action.


I found this from a website that unfortunately i can not post here

---

So regarding this it wont be too hard to debunk since its pretty much the same it just has some additional stuff

[GrandizerII]

Question:
Do Catholics and the Eastern Orthodox have the same canon of Scripture?
Answer:
No, the Eastern Orthodox have a slightly different canon of Scripture. Everything in the Catholic canon is included in the Eastern Orthodox canon, but they have some additional parts:

3 & 4 Maccabees
Psalm 151
The Prayer of Manasseh in Chronicles
1 Esdras
The reason for this is that while the New Testament canon was essentially universally agreed upon by the fourth century, minor variations in the Old Testament persisted through the Great Schism (c. 1054). These differences, as you can see, were relatively minor and nothing close to the later difference between the Protestant Old Testament and the Catholic/Orthodox Old Testament.


Another reason for the difference is that the Eastern Orthodox do not hold the same legalism as the Catholic Church when it comes to inspiration and canonical status. For them, it is a bit more fluid of an understanding; canonical simply means that something is acceptable to be read in liturgy. Even today there are some slight differences between the Eastern Orthodox Churches in regard to what each Church considers canonical (i.e. to be used in liturgy). For example, some Eastern Orthodox Churches do not read from the book of Revelation at divine liturgy. Hence they would not call it canonical, but they would still consider it to be divinely inspired and morally binding. In this fluid approach the Eastern Orthodox are very similar to ancient Judaism.

In Western Christianity the Catholic Church makes no distinction between canonical and inspired. We also have with exactness defined what books and parts of books we accept. In eastern Christianity the Orthodox Churches have have not made such exact definitions and see the differences amongst themselves as so minor as to not require any further action.


I found this from a website that unfortunately i can not post here

---

So regarding this it wont be too hard to debunk since its pretty much the same it just has some additional stuff

What are you debunking exactly?

I can see the quote but I'm not sure what you're trying to point out is wrong based on the claims being made.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

You can name the site you got the information from. Legit and important that you cite your sources. No hyperlinks yet, but give us the info.

[I believe in Harry Potter]

Im saying that according to these i should ignore and focus on the Catholic bible arguments since it's pretty much the same with my country's religion being Orthodox Christian it's just that they are going to have some extra crap in there, thats all , or maybe im wrong

---

You can name the site you got the information from. Legit and important that you cite your sources. No hyperlinks yet, but give us the info.

No i will get banned for spamming, i already got one warning for it
message if u want

[GrandizerII]

Im saying that according to these i should ignore and focus on the Catholic bible arguments since it's pretty much the same with my country's religion being Orthodox Christian it's just that they are going to have some extra crap in there, thats all , or maybe im wrong

---

You can name the site you got the information from. Legit and important that you cite your sources. No hyperlinks yet, but give us the info.

No i will get banned for spamming, i already got one warning for it
message if u want

Ok, but to be clear, not all Christians take the Bible to be literally true/inerrant.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

message if u want

Do that.

---

Im saying that according to these i should ignore and focus on the Catholic bible arguments since it's pretty much the same with my country's religion being Orthodox Christian it's just that they are going to have some extra crap in there, thats all , or maybe im wrong

---

You can name the site you got the information from. Legit and important that you cite your sources. No hyperlinks yet, but give us the info.

No i will get banned for spamming, i already got one warning for it
message if u want

You were warned for violating the 30/30 rule. Naming your source, without a link, doesn't violate that rule. Citing sources is good practice.

[I believe in Harry Potter]

Still it's a +1 weapon in the arsenal just in case they play the bible game

[EgoDeath]

An alarming number of Christians, at least in the US, do take the Bible very literally. Keep that in mind when reading about inconsistencies and contradictions in the Bible. Of course, the apologists, and some on this forum, will attempt to use the excuse of "context" to explain away anything you might find strange. That being said, context is certainly important in analyzing any text, especially one as large and as complex as the Bible. But context cannot be used to explain away every issue we run into in interpreting what the Bible is saying.

Just something to think about. Use critical thinking. Judge for yourself.