KFC POSTS:

No bait, you are the one who first said:




LULA POSTS:

KFC POSTS:


We know for certain that at the time of Christ both the Hebrew Palestinian Canon and the Greek Septuagint Canon were equally acknowledged by the Jews as authoritative. We find in the New Testament, written under Divine inspiration, of the 350 quotations from the OLd Testament, 300 were taken from the Septuagint. If the Septuagint was erroneous or those 7 books of its Canon false, then far from quoting it, the Apostles would have denounced it and warned Christians not to use it, but they did not do so.

The Church Doctors of the first 3 centuries, St.Clement of Rome, St.Irenaeus, Polycarp and others, quote or allude to them as well.

KFC POSTS:

Please, there aren't any OT passages where we pray TO the dead.

The duty to pray for the souls of the dead is inclucated in the OT and it is again taught in the NT. I've already mentioned 2Tim.1:18. Christ tells us we will not be liberated from the expiation of our sins until we have paid the "last farthing" St.Matt 5:26. Where do souls go to pay the last farthing...Catholics believe it's Purgatory.

The Catholic practice of praying for the dead and the existence of Purgatory is part of the faith of Israelites. Jews have always prayed for departed souls, "that they may be loosed from their sins". That principle is clearly set forth in 2Machabees 12:46.
"It is a holy and wholesome thought to pray for the dead, that they may be loosed from sins."

We know that pray can never loose souls once they enter Hell. The place out of which souls may secure release by the help of our prayers for them the CC calls Purgatory. The common practice among Catholics to pray, to do acts of charity, have the Holy Mass offered for departed souls is the practice Judas Machabee followed when he collected money to sent to Jerusalem for the Jewish priestly sacrifice 12:43.

Before you remind me that you reject Machabees as not in the Jewish Canon, please remember that rejection was over 300 years after the Jews had recognized the Septuagint Old Testament as correct in every respect.

What does it tell you that those books were declared apocrypha after the advent of Christianity? The motive that prompted the Jews to reject the 7 Septuagint Books was hostility to Christianity. Remember too, that was after biblical Judaism, its priesthood and sacrifices, had been displaced by the Christian priesthood and Sacrifice. The OLd Testament canon of Scripture used by Protestants was not definitively determined by the Jews until they were no longer the keepers and interpreters of GOd's law. It bears worth repeating that the Septuagint, including the books of Machabees, was an integral part of the biblical canon of Christendom from the time of its official compilation in 397 until the appearance of Luther's Bible in 1534. Luther led Protestantism from the Christian canon to the canon made by the Jews of the diaspora, when the Chruch of the Jews was no longer the Chruch of GOd. Sorry about that, it's just the way it is. Pure and simple, Luther rejected the Second Book of Machabees becasue it taught the doctrine of Purgatory.

He rejected the Epistle of James, calling it an "epistle of straw" becasue it clashed with his ideas of justification by faith alone. Ever wonder why he rejected fragments of Esther 10:4, 16:24 and Daniel 3:24-90; 13 and 14?

Whether or not you accept these facts, there it stands never to be dislodged by refusal to accept them becasue the makers of the Protestant Bible rejected them.

Here's something more to think about: If the Septuagint version is invalid, then it is up to Protestants to explain why they give Greek Septuagint names instead of Hebrew names or their English equivalent names to the books of Moses. Why call those books the Pentateuch instead of the Torah or its English designation, Instruction? Why Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, (translation of the Greek Arithmoi) and Deuteronomy instead of the Palestanian Hebrew names, Bereshith, Shemoth, Vayikra, Bemidbar, and Debarim? or their English equivalents, the Beginning, Names, ANd He cCalled, In the Wilderness, and WOrds? Why call the book the "Bible" which is the Greek (Anglicized) name the Catholic Chruch gave the Septuagint in union with the New Testament?

It's interesting to note that Chanukah, the Feast of Lights, which the Jews celebrate for 8 consecutive days each year, centers in the story of the Machabees that appears in the last two books of the Septaguint version, which the Catholic Chruch preserved and declared to have been written under Divine inspiration of the Holy Spirit.

That's right...this feast was instituted by Judas Machabees as a memorial of the rededication of the sanctuary which was defiled by Antiochus Epiphanes. The thrilling story of the Machabees, glorious martrys for their religion, is read every year by the Jews as is the book of Esther during the Feast of Purim. Considering that Chanukah ranks higher than the Feast of Purim, no reason save hostility towards Christianity during the Talmud writing days can account for rejecting the 2 Books of Machabees as uncanonical and placing the Book of Esther that has not God in it into the Jewish canon.

As an aside, I heard on a radio talk show Mel Gibson say he's interested to produce a movie on the lines of the Passion of the Christ about the glorious story of the Machabees.

Finally, at this point you are morally obligated to make a futher investigation of them. You've passed the stage of "invincible ignorance" that excuses many people who do not know sound arguments that sustain the belief that the Catholic Bible containing 73 Books is the one and only complete Library of inspired writings.

Which is the answer to my question earlier...is KFC going to hell?

I was wondering how long it would take you to finally get to it...for awhile I didn't think it was going to happen...but it all eventually comes down to this for you doesn't it...refuse Catholic Dogma...going to hell.

It's interesting that your revelation to KFC, will be the exact lynch pin to her damnation. (According to you.)

Nice.

Can you explain to me exactly what you mean by this?

I know in Judaism that Kaddish is said in synagogues especially during a memorial service. The Kaddish is also known as the "Mourners Prayer," this is the ONLY prayer that I know of that is relevant to praying for the dead. Ironically though, this prayer says nothing about the 'sins' nor anything about the 'deceased.' In fact it is quite the opposite. It is more of an attribute to the Greatness of G-D.

There is another prayer during Yom Kipor (day of atonement) where we Jews pray for the sins of our fathers. It isn't so much to ask for forgiveness of THEIR sin but that the generational curses (mentioned in Deut) be not passed upon us (broken if you will).

I will continue to look but I can't seem to find any support to the Catholic commentary here regarding the 46 verse and it being directly linked to praying for the deceased's sins.

I really hate to interrupt cuz I really want you Lula to answer these other two first. So go ahead and do that and when you're finished you can deal with me but I just couldn't resist here while I'm chomping at the bit. Looking at what you just said:






You just don't give up do you? We already concluded that Tim 1:18 can't be proven that the guy was dead. A year from now you'll still be believing Paul is telling Timothy to pray for this dead guy. That's because you like to hang onto things just to prove your point even when as Tova said...it's pointless. You can't make conclusions on NON EVIDENCE....(unless you're Lula defending the CC.)

It's funny what you hang onto and what you drop...that's for sure. Ok Matt 5:26. The whole context 5:23-26 is all about ALIVE people. Nope not seeing dead people. Proof's on you. It looks like you're take the "last farthing" (means last penny) and running with it making up something that isn't there. I think you've been talking to too many dead people Lula.....  

That's it? Where's the rest? Instead you went into the Machabees and Luther again. So where's your proof that we are to pray to or for dead people? You know me....I like the beef. So where is it? I'm sitting here with my fork and knife and waiting to dissect it.

I don't have a problem with the Machabees or the historical account of them. I know it quite well. I teach about it. That's one thing but to call this book inspired is another. Look, you have to go there to justify your belief because you CAN'T find it in the bible elswhere. That's one of the reasons Machabees is NOT in the original 66 books of the accepted bible.



I have! So now what?

You need to note the contradadictions that have kept them away from the other 66 books. You also need to realize that Christ NEVER once quoted from any of those books and that the Jews, the Apostles, and early church father's never accepted them as inspired.

I did find something called the Yizkor prayer which is similar to what you are saying Lula. However I would like to emphatically add that this prayer comes from the Zohar. The book of Jewish Mysticism (Kabbalah) which crosses the line in divination and was an inspiration to some groups of Jews coming out of Babylon.

There is much to this prayer that is divination which is quite contrary to the story of the Witch of Endor (1 Samuel).

That's my penny on the issue.

LULA POSTS:
AD POSTS:

Sure, I'll be glad to.

Catholic teaching in the afterlife stems from the Church’s belief in the Communion of Saints as taken from the second part of the ninth article of the Apostle’s Creed. The Communion of Saints is a spiritual union which unites the faithful members upon earth, the souls in Purgatory and the Saints in Heaven in the one Mystical Body, the Church, of which Christ is the Head and the participation of all in the one supernatural life. The doctrine holds that those who die in Christ don’t cease to be active participants in the one Body of Christ.

The teaching comes 1Cor. 12:12……..St.Paul teaches there is an essential unity within the Body of Christ. “The Body is one and has many members, but all the members, many though they are, are one body, and so it is with Christ.” The Church teaches that this unity isn’t destroyed by death because the power of death has been overcome by the Head of the Body, our Lord Jesus Christ.

In Romans 12:13, St. Paul exhorts us to “look on the needs of the Saints as (our) own.” This is in keeping with the Body of Christ; “God has so constructed the body ……that all members may be concerned for one another” 12:24. This concern doesn’t end with death…because the Mystical Body of Christ is a united and living entity. “He is the God of the living, not of the dead.” St. Matt. 22:32.

The Saints by their closeness to God obtain of Him many graces and favors for the faithful on earth and the souls in Purgatory; the faithful on earth by their prayers and good works honor and love the Saints and succor the suffering souls by their prayers and the Holy Mass. This concern, prayer and unity are among all the members of the Mystical Body of Christ. In 1 Cor. 12:26, St.Paul teaches that the Body of Christ share this concern, prayer and unity of fate in a spiritual sense. “If one member suffers, all the members suffer with it, if one member is honored; all the members share its joy.” St.Paul also implies that persons may sacrifice (fast) or suffer for the good of others in the Church. “Even now I find my joy in the suffering I endure for you. In my own flesh, I fill up what is lacking in the suffering of Christ for the sake of His body, the Church. Col. 1:24.

The Gospels on every page speak of the kingdom of God as a divine, spiritual kingdom established by Christ StMatt.3:2; 11:28, St. Mark 1:5; St.Luke 17:20 and united in the bond of charity (love), St.Matt 3:11; v. 48; St.Luke 12:49. It embraces all those faithful on earth and in Heaven, even the angels St.Matt. 19:29; Apoc. 21:10-27. St. John speaks of this communion as ‘the fellowship with us and our fellowship with the Father, and His Son, Jesus Christ 1JN 1:3. St. Paul regarding the Mystical Body of Christ of which all the faithful are members. All share in the same spiritual blessings, 1Cor.12:13; Eph. 2:13-20; merits Rom. 11:4-6; 1Cor. 12:25; Eph. 4:3, 7-13 and prayers, Rom. 1:9; 15:30; Phil 1:3-5; Col. 4:12.

We worship a God of justice and mercy and with that perfect balance in mind, the Church, taken from Scripture, the ancient traditions of the Fathers has defined the existence of Purgatory as that state, place, or condition which will continue until the Final Judgment where the souls who die in a state of grace yet not free from all perfection, make expiation for the sins that have already been forgiven and by doing so are purified before they enter Heaven. Scripture has it that “Nothing defiled shall enter Heaven.” Wisdom 7:25, Is. 25:8; Hab. 1:13, Apoc. 21:27. So, Purgatory is a state or place of purification (by fire) for souls before they enter into the presence of God in Heaven.


Through the practice followed by the Jews in Holy Israel through sacrifice and good works, including prayer, the Church has based this in part upon references to expiatory sacrifices for the dead found in the Old Testament 2Machabees 12: 39-43. “Making a gathering, sent twelve thousand drachmas of silver to Jerusalem (where the Temple and Altar of Jewry were located) for sacrifice to be offered for the sins of the dead…” 12: 43.

The same principle is set forth in the following orthodox Jewish prayer…
“May God remember the soul of…., who has passed into eternity, and look upon the act of charity which I perform for his intention. In recompense thereof may his soul be united with the assembly of the living, with the souls of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, of Sarah, Rebecca, Rachel, and Leah and with the other just who are in Gen-Eden. (Garden of Delights). Amen. “

The Catholic principle and practice of asking the souls that have departed from this life to pray for us is also of Jewish origin. This is vouched for by the Jewish Encyclopedia, vol. 4 page 486.

“The practice of praying for the intercession of the dead is of early origin. Caleb on reaching Hebron visited the cave of Machpelah and prayed to the patriarch to be saved for cooperating in the conspiracy of the scouts sent by Moses to make report of the conditions existing in the Holy Land. (Sotah 346). The Talmud mentions the custom of visiting the cemetary to request the dead to pray for the living. (Ta’an, 76a).

So here we see the existence of Purgatory is part of the Israelite faith even though it wasn’t designated as Purgatory.

And consider another historical fact…

At the time of Christ (and to the present in Orthodox Judaism), prayers for the dead were offered. There 3 times a year during feasts of Booths, Passover, and Weeks special remembrances for the dead were made. Jews still utter in “Mourner’s Kaddush” after the death of a loved one for 11 months---the time Jewish tradition assigns to the period of purification after death. Since this formed an essential part of Temple worship at the time of our Lord, and since there is no where He contradicts this practice, and given St.John 21:25, we believe that Christ accepted it.

KFC,

Let's get an important distinction established once for all....Catholics don't pray TO dead people. We do pray to God FOR their souls though and I have shown that it is biblical to do so from the OLd and New Testaments.

In you post #200 you asked me to show you OT passages of prayer TO the dead.

To which I responded:



Throughout this thread, I have consistently said we pray FOR the departed souls not TO them.

That is asking a dead person to do something.....

sounds like talking to the dead to me.


BY DEFINITION..when you ASK someone to intercede, you are COMMUNICATING with them.

Try asking someone something without communicating....doesn't work does it?

You say...talking to the dead is diabolical..and yet asking (which is talking) for intercession is ok.

You contradict yourself, over and over and over.

LULA POSTS: #192 [quote]Yes, Onesiphorus is dead. We can conclude that from v. 18. St.Paul here is praying for him and remembers him to Onesiphous' family (household).[/quote]


KFC POSTS:

Excuse me...only you concluded that Tim 1:18 doesn't prove that Onesiphorus was dead. I concluded that he was dead from v. 18. I only agreed the passage didn't say it outright.

KFC POSTS:

First of all, it is St.Paul himself who is praying for Onesiphorus, it's not that he's telling Timothy to pray for him.
And yes, as long as I live I will believe this verse is scriptural proof of our duty to pray for the souls of our departed brothers and sisters in Christ.

One thing that certainly can be said is that those in Heaven are alive to God. They are in the presence of God; their prayers are sent to the Throne of God. Just as ST.Paul asked the other disciples to pray for him Rom. 15:30; Col. 4:3; 1Thess. 1:11, so now we can ask him and the other Saints in Heaven to intercede for us with God. We aren't cut off from fellow Christians at death but are mysteriously brought closer. We continue in one communion, the Communion of Saints.

I realize to Protestants the term Communion of Saints and the Mystical Body of Christ mean nothing. You understand the image of the vine and its branches, understanding this as a metaphor of our relation to Christ, He being the Vine, we the branches that live through Him. You can see that if we are connected to Christ, we are connected to each other, but refuse to understand that those in Heaven are not cut off from the Vine. The Saints in Heaven remain branches, the souls in Purgatory the same, which mean they remain related to us. St.Paul develops this teaching seeing Christ as the Head, the members of the Chruch as His Mystical Body.

"Each of us has one body, with many different parts, and not all these parts have the same function; just so we, though many in number, form one body in Christ, and each acts as the counterpart of another." Rom. 12:4-5.

The ancient Jews believed in the intercession of Saints. Judas Machabees saw in a vision "most worthy of credence" how two deceased men, the high priest Onais and the prophet Jeremias interceded with God for the Jews. 2Mach. 15:11-16. And Jeremias wrote that Moses and Samuel made intercession for the Jews, apparently meaning after their deaths. 15:1. We learn that Angels and Saints place the prayers of the faithful on earth at God's feet Tobais 12:12; Apoc. 5:8; 8:3, which is to say they support the prayers with their intercession. I interpret these verses to also mean that the Angels and Saints are the ones who take our prayers to God.

And then we have the instance of Dives and Lazurus. Lazurus is seen in Abraham's bosom. If Dives could pray to Lazurus (that must have been how he spoke to him) across the unbridgeable abyss, then why should we not be able to pray to Saints across the abyss they have successfully crossed and we hope to cross?

Yes, KFC, like you and all the rest, we all like to hang onto those points which we think prove our side of the discussion. Tova7's latest comment is a good example of her doing just that!  

Sometimes we prove our point and sometimes we don't. It's explaining our position that is the most interesting.

Paul is talking to Timothy. He's not praying. He's writing a letter to Timothy. The section is 1:13-18 and it's a call to faithfulness. Paul is giving Timothy an example in Onesiphorus. There's no praying here at all. HE'S WRITING A LETTER TO TIMOTHY.

He's also NOT remembering him to Onesiphorus' family. He says to Timothy...."The Lord give mercy to the house of Onesiphorus for he often refreshed me and was not ashamed of my chain.

How is that comment remembering him to Onesiphorus' family? He's speaking to Timothy.

You're forgetting the basics of scripture Lula.....who, what, why, when and where? Who was Paul speaking to? Why was he saying this? What is the context?

and he's certainly NOT praying for a dead man.

Believe what you want.

But don't try and tell me to make a conclusion from something that is NOT there.

Yes, I think the Church's interpretation of 2 Tim.1:18 is the correct one. That St.Paul's friend Onesiphorus was dead at the time the letter to Timothy was written and here St.Paul is praying that God have mercy upon his soul. More evidence that Onesiphorus had died is found in 4:19.

I can turn the table around and say your interpretion of this passage is in complete compliance with Luther's doctrine of faith alone....in order for his doctrine to be, he had to reject the doctrines of the Communion of Saints and Purgatory and to reject them, he had to throw out the Old Testament Books of Machabees and Ecclesiasticus (Sirach).

This section and the one you quoted in 1 Cor is speaking about the gifts of the HS. It has nothing to do with dead people even in the slightest. It has to do with God giving gifts to the church. Just like the body has many parts, there are many gifts, all are diff but all serve a purpose to help the body. That's it. Nothing to do with dead people.

In fact the gifts are only temporal and scripture says that as well. We won't need them on the other side. That's why Love is superior to the gifts because while the gifts are temporary Love is eternal.



ok....let's go there. Show me where the rich man spoke to Lazarus. It's Luke 16. Show me where the rich man prayed to Lazarus. This chapter is great for many things and one of them is to show that it's impossible for the dead to communicate with the living. If you notice.....oh and BTW......all three involved in this chapter.......ARE DEAD!

Good heavens, people. No one is going to convince anyone.

And besides, we're condemning each other to Hell at this point.

Time to walk away, kids. Just walk the hecks away.

There are kewler things on JU than politics and religion. I know it may seem like that's all there is, but there's a thriving writing community and plenty of fun slice of life stuff, too. Give the bible bashing a rest and come play with us fun kids.

I brought this verse up earlier. Again, this is NOT conclusive evidence that he's dead.

Again you have to ask questions.

Q. Where was Paul during the writing of this letter?
A. Rome

Q. Where was Timothy?
A. Ephesus

Q. Where was the household of Onesiphorus?
A. Ephesus..... where Timothy was.

Q. Where was Onesiphorus during this time?
A. Well, he could be dead (we don't know) or by looking at v17 we see he was in Rome.

So what WE DO know is that Paul who was in a Roman prison was ministered to right there by Onesiphorus so he wouldn't have been home with his household. So when Paul wrote the letter he knew this. Maybe Onesiphorus moved on and was traveling to another church?

Could he be dead? Perhaps. But we can't conclude that from these two verses. You are taking an obscure verse and building a theology around it. Very common.

KFC, what does the word "mercy" and "giving mercy" mean. Here St.Paul is asking God to give mercy to Onesiphorus family?

It means that since Onesiphorus, their husband and father, is dead, they are feeling the loss and pain of his passing. So, here St.Paul remembers them...he prays that God give them mercy because of the loss for Onesiphorus who was so good. St.Paul is recognizing Onesiphorus' goodness becasue of the way he refreshed him and wasn't ashamed or afraid to visit him in prison.

and this is the problem. You can't think otherwise can you? So if they say he's praying to a dead person using this obscure verse, then you have no choice but to adhere to it?

That's the nut and bolts to this whole discussion.

it does? It says that? It says he's dead?

Couldn't it also mean that Onesiphorus is gone from them traveling around to diff churches doing what he does best? That while he's encouraging the likes of Paul and others in the ministry his family is back home and Paul is thankful to them they have allowed him to go do the work of God?

Where does it say he's dead?

Think about someone like Billy Graham. He traveled extensively all thru his marriage and his young children's lives. He was gone alot doing the work of God. She basically raised her four children alone most of the time. His household was back in SC while he traveled the globe. Couldn't Paul have written...

"The Lord give mercy unto the household of Billy for he often refreshed me and was not ashamed of my chain. But when Billy was in Rome he sought me out very diligently and found me. The Lord grant to Billy that he may find mercy of the Lord in that day and in how many things he ministered to me at Ephesus, you (Tim) know very well. "

SANCHONINO POSTS:



SANCHONINO REPLIES:



SANCHONINO REPLIES AGAIN WITH SEXINESS:



God called. He wants his Book back. You two are abusing it.

KFC POSTS:

In 2 Machabees 12:46, we read, "It is a holy and wholesome thought to pray for the dead that they might be loosed from their sins." The Church uses this verse to point to the existence of Purgatory. Luther didn't throw out the book of Machabees becasue he thought it wasn't inspired, it's becasue a book which supported Purgatory had to go...it didn't mesh with the doctrines that came out of the Protestant Reformation.

Thanks Lula.

As I said before. Those prayers that you and I have mentioned are rooted in the Zohar. This alone should raise a cause for concern.

Orthodox Judaism stems from the much of what was known in Jesus' day as the Pharisees. There was MUCH that Jesus did not approve of. The Pharisees are who we get the Talmud from.

Your are welcome AD.



In the sense of which you are speaking, I am absolutely unconcerned. I know by the infallible authority of the Catholic Chruch teaching that the practice of praying for the departed souls in Purgatory is not only true but good.

The Church has authoritatively told us which books are inspired by the Holy Ghost and are, therefore, canonical. The earliest mention of prayers for the dead in the Judaeo-Christian tradition is found in the Second Book of Machabees 12:39-46. The passage in the New Testament that can be adduced as evidence of prayers for the dead is St.Paul's prayer for Onesiphurus which I've discussed at length now with KFC.

One of the reasons given by Protestants for rejecting the 7 Books, Tobias, Judith, Wisdom, Ecclestiasticus, Baruch, 1 and 2 Machabees, plus chapters from Esther, and Daniel is that they had doubts as to their authenticity were expressed in the early Church. But so were doubts expressed regarding the Epistles St. Jude, St.James, 2nd and 3rd St.John, Hebrews, and the Book of Revelation until the Catholic Chruch made her canon of Scripture at the Council of Carthage in 397AD. It's interesting to note that Protestant churches do not include any of the 16 books in their New Testament that the Catholic Chruch rejected, even though some of them were in use during the first years of the Chruch.

The integrity of the Septuagint was not questioned by the Jews during the days when they spoke with authority on matters relating to the interpretation of the law that God had placed within their keeping. Besides, in those days the integrity of the sacred books was so faithfully safeguarded from corruption by a body of Jewish scholars that the Septuagint would not have been greeted with enthusiam everywhere were it not an exact translation of the 46 books of the inspired Hebrew text.

The canon of only 39 OLd Testament books in Protestant Bibles is of unsound historic standing for it id definitively of Jewish non-Palestinian origin having been agreed upon as a canon of the Jews during the dispersion after "the glory had departed" for Jewry, a "glory that was theirs when they had an Aaronic priesthood, a Temple, a Sanhedrin, sacrifices, and a reasonable hope of the coming of the Messias, as He had not yet come.

The definitive act of canonization of the complete Scriptures is know to have taken place at a synod of Jabneh (Javnia) in 90AD soon after the destruction of the Second Temple.

While the Catholic Chruch depends upon the use of the Septuagint (my English version of it is the Douay Rheims), by Christ and the Apostles, as well as Tradition, to sustain her declaration that the 46 books are writings inspired by God, she has her infallible power, exercised at the Councils to eliminate all doubts on the parts of Catholics like me as to their Divine authenticity.

However easy it was for the Reformers to say that some books are inspired and thus in the canon, while others aren't, in fact they had no solid theological grounds for making such determinations. Ultimately an infallible authority is needed if we are to know what belongs in the Bible and what doesn't. Without such an authority we are left with our individual preferences and we can't tell for certain if those will lead us in the right direction. The Protestant churches have not, nor do they assume to have such infallible power. So the question of authenticity and canonicity of the books in the BIble is dependent upon mere human judgment, which is faulty, hence questionable. ON the other hand, if the CC has not the infallible power she claims to have, then there is no certainty whatsoever as to whether the 46 or 39 books of the OT are of Divine origin.

Yes, thank you, I know this.

*shudders*

exactly. My sentiment as well. That's why I can't respond....for the first time in a long time.....I'm at a loss for words. Not really, but the words I have to say....aren't pretty.....so doing what I've been taught....shutting my mouth.