@denkixd51@Fedupmichael@DeuceBigalowEO@JPlayBased@bannedpastor Also I’ve alr explained how your reading of the catechism passages 33/34 go beyond what the text actually states, they don’t entail the conclusion you are leaping to make. You appeal to rabbinic tradition over the church’s u have yet to validly justify WHY
@denkixd51@Fedupmichael@DeuceBigalowEO@JPlayBased@bannedpastor 1. I did not accept it 2. He wasn’t saying that prove his point it was to point out the error in yours 3. Again u mention the Pharisees authority at that time, that does not logically entail that they have authority when it came to the church. You are Judaized beyond belief
@denkixd51@DeuceBigalowEO@Fedupmichael@JPlayBased@bannedpastor U can’t seem to grasp what is logically valid or not, so I’ll give you an example of a logically valid argument - it’s too long so I did it on notes app and ss, 2 screenshots attached below
@denkixd51@DeuceBigalowEO@Fedupmichael@JPlayBased@bannedpastor U can’t seem to grasp what is logically valid or not, so I’ll give you an example of a logically valid argument - it’s too long so I did it on notes app and ss, 2 screenshots attached below
@denkixd51@DeuceBigalowEO@Fedupmichael@JPlayBased@bannedpastor Brooo yes at a certain point in time the Pharisees/rabbinic were the religious authorities- how does that now entail the conclusion that therefore their textual tradition is authoritative on Christian canon? Our catechism doesn’t teach that, I alr explained step by step why
@denkixd51@DeuceBigalowEO@Fedupmichael@JPlayBased@bannedpastor I’ve asked this prob like 20 times I’m nearing my patience bro- you still haven’t shown how ANY of your premises entail Christian OT is not LXX. How does that entail that it can’t be LXX? They were comparing the LXX tradition to the Hebrew enumeration as a reference point bro
@denkixd51@DeuceBigalowEO@Fedupmichael@JPlayBased@bannedpastor When did I do that. I just added that the very end bc u said u were reading straight from the source I was j pointing out u aren’t actually it literally means nothing if I knew ud trip over it I wouldn’t have even added that my goodness😭but yeah def bro im the goober😭
@denkixd51@DeuceBigalowEO@Fedupmichael@JPlayBased@bannedpastor the disagreement is on what that entails-to reach ur conclusion ur adding extra premises- the Christian OT was received from Israel, the covenant people. 34. That enumeration used Hebrew as the reference point-how does that entail that the Christian OT did not come from LXX?
@denkixd51@DeuceBigalowEO@Fedupmichael@JPlayBased@bannedpastor Why do I ignore literally everything I say and then only respond to like small parts of my responses- I only added that part at the very end bc u said u were reading straight from the source it’s literally nothing important
@denkixd51@DeuceBigalowEO@Fedupmichael@JPlayBased@bannedpastor He’s saying those books aren’t in the Hebrew Jewish scriptural list being used as the reference for that enumeration. Again, that doesn’t logically entail anything about the Christian OT not coming from LXX.
@denkixd51@DeuceBigalowEO@Fedupmichael@JPlayBased@bannedpastor You say “St Philadet says they agree with the Jews who reckon the books in the original Hebrew tongue” yes they do AGREE where does he say he got it from them brother I’m getting tired of this
@denkixd51@DeuceBigalowEO@Fedupmichael@JPlayBased@bannedpastor Hebrew Church = Old Covenant Israel, not a technical Masoretic textual claim. The catechism doesn’t define a Hebrew only canon so the conclusion you’re trying to draw doesn’t logically follow. Also u r not reading directly, unless u r reading it in Slavonic/Russian
@denkixd51@DeuceBigalowEO@Fedupmichael@JPlayBased@bannedpastor Hebrew Church = Old Covenant Israel, not a technical Masoretic textual claim. The catechism doesn’t define a Hebrew only canon so the conclusion you’re trying to draw doesn’t logically follow. Also u r not reading directly, unless u r reading it in Slavonic/Russian
@denkixd51@DeuceBigalowEO@Fedupmichael@JPlayBased@bannedpastor Also the Jews used the LXX too- how do you think it was even made in the first place. again, how does that entail that the LXX is not a Christian OT? Like I said, the Jews were not monolithic. Notice how I address your responses in its entirety - u still ignore most of what I say
@denkixd51@DeuceBigalowEO@Fedupmichael@JPlayBased@bannedpastor Again please stop using AI to get your info. Please read actual books- really read the catechism if you’re going to critique it. If you’re going to say the “system” is inconsistent & discuss dogmas & infallibility, actually read on church history/tradition