COL 2:16 And The Sabbath - Are You Being Told The Truth?

[metis]

Well let me ask a question. If Jesus words were recorded in the New Testament, who was he speaking to? If it was only Jews, then Christians can ignore the whole New Testament.

At first Jews, then to all.

And when he said "keep the commandments", how many did he mean? 613? 10? none? Obviously it could not be none because he did not say" do not keep the commandments". So wether it was 10 or 613, the one about the sabbath was in there.

There are Two Commandments for Christians that Jesus rather clearly states, and they can be found here: Matthew 22[37-40].

And the Satan inspired churches fell for it 100%.

It is totally unethical to use one item such as wedge issue to then condemn all churches but your own. Jesus' Two Commandments do not even mention Sabbath worship, nor is it implied. Quite the opposite as only Jews are obligated to follow all 613 of the Mosaic Commandments.

Again, take it to Judaism DIR and ask for yourself if you don't believe me.

 

[metis]

Which of the Ten Commandments are "just for the Jews"? (which by the way, Moses was Hebrew of Levi (not Judah), and Zipporah his wife wasn't even of Israel).

The term "Jew" was what previously was called "Israelites" and/or "Hebrews". Names sometimes were changed biblically, such as "Simon" becoming "Peter" and "Saul" becoming "Paul".

God rested the 7th day in Genesis, is God merely "Jewish"?

Jesus gave the apostles the power to make adjustments since the Church never could be just a static entity. And, as Paul says, Jesus is above the Law, therefore some adjustments had to be made, some of which VERY clearly shows up in Acts and the epistles.

At first, after Jesus was gone, the disciples of Jesus met on Shabbat and also celebrated the "Agape Meal" that was on Sunday, and this shows up clearly in the "Didache". During the latter of the two days, the Eucharist was celebrated.

However, because Sunday was Jesus' resurrection day, a decision by those appointed by the Apostles was made to combine the two for just a Sunday observance to commemorate Jesus and his resurrection and the Eucharist.

Now, what you're essentially saying is that there's something seriously wrong with that, which logically doesn't even make any sense whatsoever as Jesus is the head of the Church, not Mosaic Law. Nor does observance of Shabbat show up in Jesus' Two Commandments that he said we must follow. What you are doing is essentially adding your own commandment to those Two.

 

[sooda]

From Habiru to Hebrews and Other Essays
books.google.com › books

Robert Wolfe - 2011 - ‎History
Robert Wolfe. “Habiru”. I too affirm the identity of the two groups, and therefore I too use the term “Habiru”, which sounds more like “Hebrew”. But ultimately it ...

 

[sojourner]

In the context of "sin", which is transgression of God's Law and name/character.

One cannot love "in the context of sin," for love is not present in sin.

 

[sojourner]

Here let me help. How many commandments are there in God's 10 Commandments that were written and spoken by God alone that give us the knowledge of what sin is when broken?

Are there 9, 10 or 613? The answer to this question is found in the scriptures here.. *EXODUS 34:28; DEUTERONOMY 4:13; DEUTERONOMY 10:4-5.

Do you know the difference between Gods eternal Law (10 Commandments) that gives us the knowledge of what sin is when broken and the shadow laws from the MOSAIC BOOK of the law that defines all the sanctuary laws, ceremonial laws, sacrificial laws for sin offerings, annual feastivals, Levitical priesthood as well as all the civil laws of the nation of ISRAEL under the old covenant?

Just trying to help the discussion

Back to this old misnomer nonsense, I see.

 

[coconut theology]

One cannot love "in the context of sin," for love is not present in sin.

That's what I said. Thus anyone who is knowingly transgressing the Ten Commandments (which includes Exodus 20:8-11, the 4th commandment, the 7th day the sabbath of the Lord thy God) isn't fulfilling love (to God or neighbour (near brother)).

 

[lostwanderingsoul]

What Paul said Jesus taught, or Luke ?

I thought you believe anything the apostles said.

 

[coconut theology]

The term "Jew" was what previously was called "Israelites" and/or "Hebrews". Names sometimes were changed biblically, such as "Simon" becoming "Peter" and "Saul" becoming "Paul". ...

That last example is 'apples to oranges' fallacy. The two things are not the same. The first (Hebrews, Israelites and Jews) deals with nationality, genealogy, not a 'name change' (as Abram to Abraham).

Each (Hebrews, Israelites and Jews) are differing terms.

Hebrew means those who are of the lineage of Eber. An Eber-ew, such as Abram, Joseph and Moses were. Hebrew is an over arching term going back to all those descended of Eber.

Israelite means those who are of the lineage of Jacob (renamed, "Israel"), such as Joseph, Moses, etc. It is only an overarching term to those directly related to Jacob/Israel, and would not include those such as of Edom (Esau, etc), whereas 'Hebrew' would apply to such.

Jew means (primarily, though there is some leeway in after years, stemming from the Kingdom of 'Judah') those of the lineage of Judah, but later also included those of the remaining southern tribes (not Northern, who were Samaritans, Assyrians, etc, John 4:9), such as Judah, Benjamin (Esther 2:5; or like Paul of the NT, Acts 22:3, also calling himself an Hebrew of the Hebrews; Philippians 3:5 and Jesus was also of Judah (Revelation 5:5), and would be therefore the "king of the Jews" (Matthew 27:11; the southern Remnant, Kingdom of Judah where Jerusalem was.) and Levi, and any individual members of the northern tribes who still existed. Likewise this term would not be applied to those of Edom (Esau), whereas 'Hebrew' would be.

Abram was not a "Jew". Abram was not an "Israelite".

Moses was an Hebrew, an Israelite, but would not have been classed as "Jew" then, since he was of the tribe of Levi, and would therefore be Levite. It might later have been retroactively applied, but that has little to do with what we are speaking about in regards the Ten Commandments being only given to "Jews". It is nonsense to say that the Ten Commandments were only given to the "Jews". It is scripturally inaccurate, historically inaccurate and genealogically inaccurate. As stated, Moses' wife, Zipporah wasn't a 'Jew' and neither Israelite. The mixed multitude were Egyptians, Ethiopians, maybe some Arabians, etc.

 

[lostwanderingsoul]

At first Jews, then to all.

There are Two Commandments for Christians that Jesus rather clearly states, and they can be found here: Matthew 22[37-40].

It is totally unethical to use one item such as wedge issue to then condemn all churches but your own. Jesus' Two Commandments do not even mention Sabbath worship, nor is it implied. Quite the opposite as only Jews are obligated to follow all 613 of the Mosaic Commandments.

Again, take it to Judaism DIR and ask for yourself if you don't believe me.

If you read Mathew 19:17 in the New Testament ( which I believe applis to Christians ) you will see that Jesus lists several ( MORE THAN TWO ) commandments such as do not kill and do not steal so it would seem that these apply to Christians. Or should we throw out the book of Matthew and just pick those books we agree with?

 

[coconut theology]

If you read Mathew 19:17 in the New Testament ( which I believe applis to Christians ) you will see that Jesus lists several ( MORE THAN TWO ) commandments such as do not kill and do not steal so it would seem that these apply to Christians. Or should we throw out the book of Matthew and just pick those books we agree with?

Some whole 'churches' do that (using crazy dispensational ideologies), and some even place 'Paul' as the antichrist! How far from reality and truth are they?

 

[coconut theology]

...There are Two Commandments for Christians that Jesus rather clearly states, and they can be found here: Matthew 22[37-40]. ...

Jesus was talking to "Jews" (Matthew 22:34) as you say elsewhere, and is referencing "the law" (Matthew 22:36). Jesus was citing Deuteronomy 6:5 and Leviticus 19:17-18, again written to "Jews" as you elsewhere say. Your logic cannot hold, nor sustain itself. It is self-refuting. In that you claim the Ten Commandments are for "Jews" and turn right around and say that Love God and neighbour (Matthew 22:37-40) are for everyone, which originally are given to those you classify as "Jews", written in the OT, even in "the law". Show me 'one' Gentile present in the context of Matthew 22.

I already know that the Ten Commandments are for everyone. Yet, your argument falls on its head trying to make it not so, just to escape the conclusion that the 4th commandment (Exodus 20:8-11) is for you also.

Here is a picture of your theology:

Ten Commandments:

[01] For everyone in Christ Jesus under the New Covenant
[02] For everyone in Christ Jesus under the New Covenant
[03] For everyone in Christ Jesus under the New Covenant
[04] Just for the "Jews"
[05] For everyone in Christ Jesus under the New Covenant
[06] For everyone in Christ Jesus under the New Covenant
[07] For everyone in Christ Jesus under the New Covenant
[08] For everyone in Christ Jesus under the New Covenant
[09] For everyone in Christ Jesus under the New Covenant
[10] For everyone in Christ Jesus under the New Covenant​

Two Greatest Commandments:

[01] For everyone in Christ Jesus under the New Covenant
[02] For everyone in Christ Jesus under the New Covenant​

even though [01 and 02] are cited in "the law", in the OT, in Deuteronomy 6:5 and Leviticus 19:17-18, and are in the context of the Ten Commandments (Deuteronomy 5).

 

[sojourner]

That's what I said. Thus anyone who is knowingly transgressing the Ten Commandments (which includes Exodus 20:8-11, the 4th commandment, the 7th day the sabbath of the Lord thy God) isn't fulfilling love (to God or neighbour (near brother)).

Except that the Church -- under God's authority -- moved the day of observance to match the new paradigm of the new covenant and the Resurrection. Therefore, not a sin. Especially for those of us who are Gentile and aren't bound by the Judaic Law at any rate.

 

[coconut theology]

Except that the Church -- under God's authority -- moved the day of observance ...

Book, Chapter, Verse in scripture please. 'Rome' says that no such example can be given in the NT - ROME'S CHALLENGE - WHY DO PROTESTANTS KEEP SUNDAY?

 

[sojourner]

Or should we throw out the book of Matthew and just pick those books we agree with?

Well, you've managed to throw out Wisdom, Sirach, Esdras, Maccabees, Baruch, the Shepherd of Hermas, Thomas and the Didache, among others. Yet you condemn the practice. Interesting double standard. Incidentally, the different gospelers have Jesus give different answers, so it's not simply a matter of "what's in the bible," it's a matter of making informed choices as to which texts and passages inform a given circumstance.

 

[sojourner]

Book, Chapter, Verse in scripture please. 'Rome' says that no such example can be given in the NT - ROME'S CHALLENGE - WHY DO PROTESTANTS KEEP SUNDAY?

How many times must I repeat myself that I'm not going to play the sola scriptura game? And I've already given the text references where it may be found. You either missed it or ignored it. Either way, that's your bad, not mine.

BTW, I disregard the validity of the views of the linked web site. It's not scholarly and makes theological assumptions not in evidence.

 

[coconut theology]

Well, you've managed to throw out Wisdom, Sirach, Esdras, Maccabees, Baruch, the Shepherd of Hermas, Thomas and the Didache, among others. ....

History records those as false materials, as well as the material within them so do:

Even the so-called Canon of Laodicea (4th cent.) Canon LX does not give the 'Catholic' Canon.

"... Canon LX.

These are all the books of Old Testament appointed to be read: 1, Genesis of the world; 2, The Exodus from Egypt; 3, Leviticus; 4, Numbers; 5, Deuteronomy; 6, Joshua, the son of Nun; 7, Judges, Ruth; 8, Esther; 9, Of the Kings, First and Second; 10, Of the Kings, Third and Fourth; 11, Chronicles, First and Second; 12, Esdras, First and Second; 13, The Book of Psalms; 14, The Proverbs of Solomon; 15, Ecclesiastes; 16, The Song of Songs; 17, Job; 18, The Twelve Prophets; 19, Isaiah; 20, Jeremiah, and Baruch, the Lamentations, and the Epistle; 21, Ezekiel; 22, Daniel.

And these are the books of the New Testament: Four Gospels, according to Matthew, Mark, Luke and John; The Acts of the Apostles; Seven Catholic Epistles, to wit, one of James, two of Peter, three of John, one of Jude; Fourteen Epistles of Paul, one to the Romans, two to the Corinthians, one to the Galatians, one to the Ephesians, one to the Philippians, one to the Colossians, two to the Thessalonians, one to the Hebrews, two to Timothy, one to Titus, and one to Philemon ..." - Link
​

Furthermore:

"The apocryphal books were not admitted into the canon of Scripture during the first four centuries of the Christian church. They are not mentioned in the catalogue of inspired writings made by Melito, bishop of Sardis, who flourished in the second century, nor in those of Origen, in the third century, of Athanasius, Hilary, Cyril of Jerusalem, Epiphanius, Gregory Nazianzen, Amphilochius, Jerome, Rufinus, and others of the fourth century; nor in the catalogue of canonical books recognized by the Council of Laodicea, held in the same century, whose canons were received by the Catholic Church; so that, as Bishop Burnet well observes, "we have the concurring sense of the whole church of God in this matter." To this decisive evidence against the canonical authority of the apocryphal books, we may add that they were never read in the Christian church until the fourth century, when, as Jerome informs us, they were read "for example of life and instruction of manners, but were not applied to establish any doctrine;" and contemporary writers state that although they were not approved as canonical or inspired writings, yet some of them, particularly Judith, Wisdom, and Ecclesiasticus, were allowed to be perused by catechumens. As proof that they were not regarded as canonical in the fifth century, Augustine relates that when the book of Wisdom was publicly read in the church, it was given to the readers or inferior ecclesiastical officers, who read it in a lower place than those books which were universally acknowledged to be canonical, which were read by the bishops and presbyters in a more eminent and conspicuous manner. To conclude: Notwithstanding the veneration in which these books were held by the Western Church, it is evident that the same authority was never ascribed to them as to the Old and New Testament; until the last Council of Trent, at its fourth session, presumed to place them all (excepting the prayer of Manasseh and the third and fourth books of Esdras) in the same rank with the inspired writings of Moses and the prophets." - An Introduction to the Critical Study and Knowledge of the Holy Scriptures. by Thomas Hartwell Horne, B.D. of Saint John's College, Cambridge; rector of the United Parishes of Saint Edmund the King and Martyr and Saint Nicholas Acons, Lombard Street; Prebendary of Saint Paul's; New Edition, from the Eighth London Edition, Corrected and Enlarged. Illustrated with numerous maps and fac-similies of Biblical Manuscripts. Volume I. Philadelphia: Published by J. Whetham & Son, 144 Chestnut Street. Stereotyped by L. Johnson. 1841.; page 426 (left column) - An Introduction to the Critical Study and Knowledge of the Holy Scriptures

How Many Books Are In The Old Testament?
​

Apocrypha, and the reasons they are not accepted as "canon":

"... 1. Not one of them is in the Hebrew language, which was alone (a little Syriac/Chaldee in Daniel, etc.) used by the inspired historians and poets of the Old Testament.

2. Not one of the writers lays any claim to inspiration.

3. These books were never acknowledged as sacred Scriptures by the Jewish Church, and therefore were never sanctioned by our Lord.

4. They were not allowed a place among the sacred books, during the first four centuries of the Christian Church.

5. They contain fabulous statements, and statements which contradict not only the canonical Scriptures, but themselves; as when, in the two Books of Maccabees, Antiochus Epiphanes is made to die three different deaths in as many different places.

6. It inculcates doctrines at variance with the Bible, such as prayers for the dead...

7. It teaches immoral practices, such as lying, suicide, assassination and magical incantation. ..." - Sam Gipp - https://samgipp.com/answerbook/?page=34.htm​

As for the amount of 'books' in the whole of scripture as we now have them in the KJB, we can know that ther are 66 books:

There are two stacks of 6 loaves on the table of shewbread, which represents God's word, taken together. 6-6.

Across from the table of shew bread is the candlestick when all the flowers, knops etc added up. 66.

The book of Isaiah, being the mini bible, from creation to redemption and new heavens and earth, are chapters. 66

The number of man is 6. Jesus took upon himself the form of a servant, and became 'man', 6. There God who took upon himself humanity (Jesus) and man. 6 - 6.

The OT itself, the standard of judgment is the limit of the law, meaning, 40 stripes save 1. 39.

The NT is a little more interesting, in that there are 4 gospels, corresponding to the 4 living creatures of Revelation, 7 letters to 7 churches by Paul as like in Revelation, etc and it also ties into the Sanctuary. The 4 gospels in the altar of Sacrifice, the book of Acts the Laver of Baptism, the letters to the churches and epistles the life in the Holy Place (bread (word), incense (prayer), light (share)), and Revelation ending in the Most Holy Place. It also is 3 to the 3rd power (3x3x3). 27.

They’re absolutely true. Consider the 7 Branch Candlestick and 66 number in totaling all the knops, etc.

Psa_119:105 NUN. Thy word is a lamp unto my feet, and a light unto my path.

Exo 25:31 And thou shalt make a candlestick of pure gold: of beaten work shall the candlestick be made: his shaft, and his branches, his bowls, his knops, and his flowers, shall be of the same.

Exo 25:32 And six branches shall come out of the sides of it; three branches of the candlestick out of the one side, and three branches of the candlestick out of the other side:

Exo 25:33 Three bowls made like unto almonds, with a knop and a flower in one branch; and three bowls made like almonds in the other branch, with a knop and a flower: so in the six branches that come out of the candlestick.

Exo 25:34 And in the candlestick shall be four bowls made like unto almonds, with their knops and their flowers.

Exo 25:35 And there shall be a knop under two branches of the same, and a knop under two branches of the same, and a knop under two branches of the same, according to the six branches that proceed out of the candlestick.

Exo 25:36 Their knops and their branches shall be of the same: all it shall be one beaten work of pure gold.

Exo 25:37 And thou shalt make the seven lamps thereof: and they shall light the lamps thereof, that they may give light over against it.

Exo_37:17 And he made the candlestick of pure gold: of beaten work made he the candlestick; his shaft, and his branch, his bowls, his knops, and his flowers, were of the same:

Exo_37:20 And in the candlestick were four bowls made like almonds, his knops, and his flowers:

Exo_37:22 Their knops and their branches were of the same: all of it was one beaten work of pure gold.​

[1] Knops per side (6) branch x 3 = 18
[2] Flowers per side (6) branch x 3 = 18
[3] Bowls per (6) branch x 3 = 18
[4] 6 side branches (3 of each knop, flower and bowl per (thus 9)) = 54
[5] 1 central (branch) stock (4 knops, 4 flowers, 4 bowls) = 12
[6] Total = 18 + 18 + 18 + 12 = 66

 

[coconut theology]

Well, you've managed to throw out Wisdom, Sirach, Esdras, Maccabees, Baruch, the Shepherd of Hermas, Thomas and the Didache, among others. ....

Continuing:

For instance (shown from the KJB and DR; Douay Rheims Online, 'DR' from here on), there was already the "church in the wilderness", which was with Moses, children of Israel:

Act. 7:38 KJB This is he, that was in the church in the wilderness with the angel which spake to him in the mount Sina, and with our fathers: who received the lively oracles to give unto us:

Act. 7:38 DR This is he that was in the church in the wilderness, with the angel who spoke to him on mount Sina, and with our fathers; who received the words of life to give unto us.​

Additionally, Paul wrote that the "oracles of God" were committed unto the Jews, and Peter also mentions this:

Rom. 3:1 KJB What advantage then hath the Jew? or what profit is there of circumcision?

Rom. 3:2 KJB Much every way: chiefly, because that unto them were committed the oracles of God.

Rom. 3:1 DR What advantage then hath the Jew, or what is the profit of circumcision?

Rom. 3:2 DR Much every way. First indeed, because the words of God were committed to them.

Heb. 5:12 KJB For when for the time ye ought to be teachers, ye have need that one teach you again which be the first principles of the oracles of God; and are become such as have need of milk, and not of strong meat.

Heb. 5:12 DR For whereas for the time you ought to be masters, you have need to be taught again what are the first elements of the words of God: and you are become such as have need of milk, and not of strong meat.

1 Pet. 4:11 KJB If any man speak, let him speak as the oracles of God; if any man minister, let him do it as of the ability which God giveth: that God in all things may be glorified through Jesus Christ, to whom be praise and dominion for ever and ever. Amen.

1 Pet. 4:11 DR If any man speak, let him speak, as the words of God. If any man minister, let him do it, as of the power, which God administereth: that in all things God may be honoured through Jesus Christ: to whom is glory and empire for ever and ever. Amen.​

Now the DR here (1 Pet. 4:11), inserting a comma changes the meaning, from the text itself as from saying (KJB) that when men speak they are to speak what the scriptures say, and the Jesuit (DR) makes it to mean that whatever a man speaks, that is "the words of God", thus eliminating the foundation from the text itself, to men (in what they say).

The entire OT texts were already 'canon' in the days of Jesus, none of which included any of the apocrypha (aka 'catholic deuterocanon'). Jesus Himself identified the texts:

Luk. 24:44 KJB And he said unto them, These are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me.

Luk. 24:45 KJB Then opened he their understanding, that they might understand the scriptures,

Luk. 24:44 DR And he said to them: These are the words which I spoke to you, while I was yet with you, that all things must needs be fulfilled, which are written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me.

Luk. 24:45 DR Then he opened their understanding, that they might understand the scriptures.​

Jesus identified the beginning and the ending of the OT among the children of Israel:

Mat. 23:35 KJB That upon you may come all the righteous blood shed upon the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel unto the blood of Zacharias son of Barachias, whom ye slew between the temple and the altar.

Mat. 23:35 DR That upon you may come all the just blood that hath been shed upon the earth, from the blood of Abel the just, even unto the blood of Zacharias the son of Barachias, whom you killed between the temple and the altar.

Luk. 11:50 KJB That the blood of all the prophets, which was shed from the foundation of the world, may be required of this generation;

Luk. 11:50 DR That the blood of all the prophets which was shed from the foundation of the world, may be required of this generation,

Luk. 11:51 KJB From the blood of Abel unto the blood of Zacharias, which perished between the altar and the temple: verily I say unto you, It shall be required of this generation.

Luk. 11:51 DR From the blood of Abel unto the blood of Zacharias, who was slain between the altar and the temple: Yea I say to you, It shall be required of this generation.​

This is an important statement by Jesus since, it gives two 'book ends' on the prophets, "Abel" unto "Zacharias", which was the "A" to "Z" of the OT, since according to the children of Israel's reckoning, Chronicles was the last bookof the Tanakh (OT) [Torah (Gen. to Deut.), Prophets (Jos. to Mal.), Writings (Psa. to 2 Chron.)]:

2 Chron. 24:20 KJB And the Spirit of God came upon Zechariah the son of Jehoiada the priest, which stood above the people, and said unto them, Thus saith God, Why transgress ye the commandments of the LORD, that ye cannot prosper? because ye have forsaken the LORD, he hath also forsaken you.

2 Chron. 24:20 DR The spirit of God then came upon Zacharias the son of Joiada the priest, and he stood in the sight of the people, and said to them: Thus saith the Lord God: Why transgress you the commandment of the Lord which will not be for your good, and have forsaken the Lord, to make him forsake you?

2 Chron. 24:21 KJB And they conspired against him, and stoned him with stones at the commandment of the king in the court of the house of the LORD.

2 Chron. 24:21 DR And they gathered themselves together against him, and stoned him at the king's commandment in the court of the house of the Lord.

2 Chron. 24:22 KJB Thus Joash the king remembered not the kindness which Jehoiada his father had done to him, but slew his son. And when he died, he said, The LORD look upon it, and require it.

2 Chron. 24:22 DR And king Joas did not remember the kindness that Joiada his father had done to him, but killed his son. And when he died, he said: The Lord see, and require it.​

I would recommend a helpful webpage with further detail - How Many Books Are In The Old Testament?

Peter also already knew (well before AD 90, sometime circa AD 65-68, since the epistles mention Peter's nearing death (2 Pet. 1:14) what the 'scriptures' were in regards to Paul's epistles (14 letters, Romans to Hebrews; ie, Romans, 1 Corinthians, 2 Corinthians, Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, 1 Thessalonians, 2 Thessalonians, 1 Timothy, 2 Timothy, Titus, Philemon, Hebrews):

2 Pet. 3:16 KJB As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.

2 Pet. 3:16 DR As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are certain things hard to be understood, which the unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, to their own destruction.​

The Holy Scriptures are inspired of God, and are therefore, not 'catholic', but rather is God's word, the "word of God" (Jhn. 10:35):

2 Tim. 3:15 KJB And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.

2 Tim. 3:15 DR And because from thy infancy thou hast known the holy scriptures, which can instruct thee to salvation, by the faith which is in Christ Jesus.

2 Tim. 3:16 KJB All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

2 Tim. 3:16 DR All scripture, inspired of God, is profitable to teach, to reprove, to correct, to instruct in justice,

2 Tim. 3:17 KJB That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.

2 Tim. 3:17 DR That the man of God may be perfect, furnished to every good work.

2 Pet. 1:21 KJB For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.

2 Pet. 1:21 DR For prophecy came not by the will of man at any time: but the holy men of God spoke, inspired by the Holy Ghost.​

The "scriptures" were already well known in Jesus' day in regards the OT, as per:

Dan. 10:21; Mat. 21:42. 22:29, 26:54,56; Mar. 12:10,24, 14:49, 15:28; Luk. 4:21, 24:27,32,45; Jhn. 2:22, 5:39, 7:38,42, 10:35, 13:18, 17:12, 19:24,28,36,37, 20:9; Act. 1:16, 8:32,35, 17:2,11, 18:24,28; Rom. 1:2, 4:3, 9:17, 10:11, 11:2, 15:4, 16:26; 1 Cor. 15:3,4; Gal. 3:8,22, 4:30; 1 Tim. 5:18; 2 Tim. 3:15,16; Jam. 2:8,23, 4:5; 1 Pet. 2:6; 2 Pet. 1:20, 3:16 ​

In fact, how could Jesus say to the Jews, "Search the scriptures" that prophesied of Christ Jesus, if the Jews had no idea what "the scriptures" were, to search, and every man had their own idea as to what constituted them?

Jhn. 5:39 KJB Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me.

Jhn. 5:39 DR Search the scriptures, for you think in them to have life everlasting; and the same are they that give testimony of me.​

In fact, none of the apocrypha ('catholic deuterocanon'), are cited by any of the Apostles in the NT as fulfilling prophecy (some might attempt to point to Jud. citing so-called 'Enoch' (pseudopigrahpon), but that is another matter, and it doesn't either, as both are referring to Gen. and Deut.).

The angel Gabriel, in the days of Daniel was able to explain to Daniel, the prophecies given him from the very texts which existed before 'Daniel' was written (basically Gen. to Jer. (maybe some Eze.) and others hadn't yet been written by then, such as Ezr., Neh., Est., etc. and some of the 'minor prophets'):

Dan. 10:21 KJB But I will shew thee that which is noted in the scripture of truth: and there is none that holdeth with me in these things, but Michael your prince.

Dan. 10:21 DR But I will tell thee what is set down in the scripture of truth: and none is my helper in all these things, but Michael your prince.​

As for the 'apocrypha ('catholic deuterocanon') and gnostic materials (Thomas, etc), they were never accepted as Canon in the OT, not even by Jesus' day, nor Josephus' day.

 

[sojourner]

Your logic cannot hold, nor sustain itself. It is self-refuting. In that you claim the Ten Commandments are for "Jews" and turn right around and say that Love God and neighbour (Matthew 22:37-40) are for everyone, which originally are given to those you classify as "Jews", written in the OT, even in "the law". Show me 'one' Gentile present in the context of Matthew 22.

Except that Paul makes much the same argument to Gentiles.

I already know that the Ten Commandments are for everyone.

No, you believe that the 10 cmndmts are for everyone.

 

[coconut theology]

Except that Paul makes much the same argument to Gentiles.

Book, Chapter, Verse. Then I will show you quite mistaken from that same place in its context and language.

 

[coconut theology]

...No, you believe that the 10 cmndmts are for everyone.

No, I "also" believe.