Carlene

Last sentence, first paragraph: These books and chapters were found in Bible manuscripts in Greek only, and were not part of the Hebrew Canon of the Old Testament, as determined by the Jews. That doesn't say that the Catholic Church found the books to be uninspired. It just says they were not part of the Hebrew Canon as determined by the Jews.

Would you be willing to discuss (publicly) exactly what makes you an authority on Catholic dogma?

I believe this is the reference you mentioned. Nowhere in it do I read that the Catholic Church "admits" that the Apocrypha is not divinely inspired. Perhaps you could point that out to me? THE "APOCRYPHA": WHY IT'S PART OF THE BIBLE (Bible verses: RSV) The Old Testament in Catholic Bibles contains seven more books than are found in Protestant Bibles (46 and 39, respectively). Protestants call these seven books the Apocrypha and Catholics know them as the deuterocanonical books. These seven books are: Tobit, Judith, 1 and 2 Maccabees, Wisdom of Solomon, Ecclesiasticus (or, Sirach), and Baruch. Also, Catholic Bibles contain an additional six chapters (107 verses) in the book of Esther and another three in the book of Daniel (174 verses). These books and chapters were found in Bible manuscripts in Greek only, and were not part of the Hebrew Canon of the Old Testament, as determined by the Jews. All of these were dogmatically acknowledged as Scripture at the Council of Trent in 1548 (which means that Catholics were henceforth not allowed to question their canonicity), although the tradition of their inclusion was ancient. At the same time, the Council rejected 1 and 2 Esdras and the Prayer of Manasses as part of Sacred Scripture (these are often included in collections of the "Apocrypha" as a separate unit). The Catholic perspective on this issue is widely misunderstood. Protestants accuse Catholics of "adding" books to the Bible, while Catholics retort that Protestants have "booted out" part of Scripture. Catholics are able to offer very solid and reasonable arguments in defense of the scriptural status of the deuterocanonical books. These can be summarized as follows: 1) They were included in the Septuagint (the Greek translation of the Old Testament from the third century B.C.), which was the "Bible" of the Apostles. They usually quoted the Old Testament scriptures (in the text of the New Testament) from the Septuagint. 2) Almost all of the Church Fathers regarded the Septuagint as the standard form of the Old Testament. The deuterocanonical books were in no way differentiated from the other books in the Septuagint, and were generally regarded as canonical. St. Augustine thought the Septuagint was apostolically-sanctioned and inspired, and this was the consensus in the early Church. 3) Many Church Fathers (such as St. Irenaeus, St. Cyprian, Tertullian) cite these books as Scripture without distinction. Others, mostly from the east (for example, St. Athanasius, St. Cyril of Jerusalem, St. Gregory Nazianzus) recognized some distinction but nevertheless still customarily cited the deuterocanonical books as Scripture. St. Jerome, who translated the Hebrew Bible into Latin (the Vulgate, early fifth century), was an exception to the rule (the Church has never held that individual Fathers are infallible). 4) The Church Councils at Hippo (393) and Carthage (397, 419), influenced heavily by St. Augustine, listed the deuterocanonical books as Scripture, which was simply an endorsement of what had become the general consensus of the Church in the west and most of the east. Thus, the Council of Trent merely reiterated in stronger terms what had already been decided eleven and a half centuries earlier, and which had never been seriously challenged until the onset of Protestantism. 5) Since these Councils also finalized the 66 canonical books which all Christians accept, it is quite arbitrary for Protestants to selectively delete seven books from this authoritative Canon. This is all the more curious when the complicated, controversial history of the New Testament Canon is understood. 6) Pope Innocent I concurred with and sanctioned the canonical ruling of the above Councils (Letter to Exsuperius, Bishop of Toulouse) in 405. 7) The earliest Greek manuscripts of the Old Testament, such as Codex Sinaiticus (fourth century), and Codex Alexandrinus (c.450) include all of the deuterocanonical books mixed in with the others and not separated. 8) The practice of collecting these books into a separate unit dates back no further than 1520 (in other words, it was a novel innovation of Protestantism). This is admitted by, for example, the Protestant New English Bible (Oxford University Press, 1976), in its "Introduction to the Apocrypha," (p.iii). 9) Protestantism, following Martin Luther, removed the deuterocanonical books from their Bibles due to their clear teaching of doctrines which had been recently repudiated by Protestants, such as prayers for the dead (Tobit 12:12, 2 Maccabees 12:39-45 ff.; cf. 1 Corinthians 15:29), intercession of dead saints (2 Maccabees 15:14; cf. Revelation 6:9-10), and intermediary intercession of angels (Tobit 12:12,15; cf. Revelation 5:8, 8:3-4). We know this from plain statements of Luther and other Reformers. 10) Luther was not content even to let the matter rest there, and proceeded to cast doubt on many other books of the Bible which are accepted as canonical by all Protestants. He considered Job and Jonah mere fables, and Ecclesiastes incoherent and incomplete. He wished that Esther (along with 2 Maccabees) "did not exist," and wanted to "toss it into the Elbe" river. 11) The New Testament fared scarcely better under Luther's gaze. He rejected from the New Testament Canon ("chief books") Hebrews, James ("epistle of straw"), Jude and Revelation, and placed them at the end of his translation, as a New Testament "Apocrypha." He regarded them as non-apostolic. Of the book of Revelation he said, "Christ is not taught or known in it." These opinions are found in Luther's Prefaces to biblical books, in his German translation of 1522. 12) Although the New Testament does not quote any of these books directly, it does closely reflect the thought of the deuterocanonical books in many passages. For example, Revelation 1:4 and 8:3-4 appear to make reference to Tobit 12:15: Revelation 1:4 Grace to you . . . from the seven spirits who are before his throne. {see also 3:1, 4:5, 5:6} Revelation 8:3-4 And another angel came and stood at the altar with a golden censer; and he was given much incense to mingle with the prayers of all the saints upon the golden altar before the throne; and the smoke of the incense rose with the prayers of the saints from the hand of the angel before God. {see also Revelation 5:8} Tobit 12:15 I am Raphael, one of the seven holy angels who present the prayers of the saints and enter into the presence of the glory of the Holy One. St. Paul, in 1 Corinthians 15:29, seems to have 2 Maccabees 12:44 in mind. This saying of Paul is one of the most difficult in the New Testament for Protestants to interpret, given their theology: 1 Corinthians 15:29 Otherwise, what do people mean by being baptized on behalf of the dead? If the dead are not raised at all, why are people baptized on their behalf? 2 Maccabees 12:44 For if he were not expecting that those who had fallen would rise again, it would have been superfluous and foolish to pray for the dead. This passage of St. Paul shows that it was the custom of the early Church to watch, pray and fast for the souls of the deceased. In Scripture, to be baptized is often a metaphor for affliction or (in the Catholic understanding) penance (for example, Matthew 3:11, Mark 10:38-39, Luke 3:16, 12:50). Since those in heaven have no need of prayer, and those in hell can't benefit from it, these practices, sanctioned by St. Paul, must be directed towards those in purgatory. Otherwise, prayers and penances for the dead make no sense, and this seems to be largely what Paul is trying to bring out. The "penance interpretation" is contextually supported by the next three verses, where St. Paul speaks of Why am I in peril every hour? . . . I die every day, and so forth. As a third example, Hebrews 11:35 mirrors the thought of 2 Maccabees 7:29: Hebrews 11:35 Women received their dead by resurrection. Some were tortured, refusing to accept release, that they might rise again to a better life. 2 Maccabees 7:29 Do not fear this butcher, but prove worthy of your brothers. Accept death, so that in God's mercy I may get you back again with your brothers. {a mother speaking to her son: see 7:25-26} 13) Ironically, in some of the same verses where the New Testament is virtually quoting the "Apocrypha," doctrines are taught which are rejected by Protestantism, and which were a major reason why the deuterocanonical books were "demoted" by them. Therefore, it was not as easy to eliminate these disputed doctrines from the Bible as it was (and is) supposed, and Protestants still must grapple with much New Testament data which does not comport with their beliefs. 14) Despite this lowering of the status of the deuterocanonical books by Protestantism, they were still widely retained separately in Protestant Bibles for a long period of time (unlike the prevailing practice today). John Wycliffe, considered a forerunner of Protestantism, included them in his English translation. Luther himself kept them separately in his Bible, describing them generally as (although sub-scriptural) "useful and good to read." Zwingli and the Swiss Protestants, and the Anglicans maintained them in this secondary sense also. The English Geneva Bible (1560) and Bishop's Bible (1568) both included them as a unit. Even the Authorized, or King James Version of 1611 contained the "Apocrypha" as a matter of course. And up to the present time many Protestant Bibles continue this practice. The revision of the King James Bible (completed in 1895) included these books, as did the Revised Standard Version (1957), the New English Bible (1970), and the Goodspeed Bible (1939), among others. 15) The deuterocanonical books are read regularly in public worship in Anglicanism, and also among the Eastern Orthodox, and most Protestants and Jews fully accept their value as historical and religious documents, useful for teaching, even though they deny them full canonical status. It is apparent, then, that the Catholic "case" for these scriptural books carries a great deal of weight, certainly at the very least equal to the Protestant view.

Actually, you are misinformed but I have decided not to spend huge blocks of time arguing religious, political, or ethical questions on the numerous forums to which I subscribe. It is not only non-productive in the extreme, but it's actually very BAD for one of the things that matters most - my health. I have found that I am well on my way to being an Internet slug, and I hate that. I own 6 pair of jeans. Three of them are tight. The other 3 are hopeless. I was wearing ALL of those jeans quite comfortably at Christmas. The only thing that's changed is that I have hardly walked at all in weeks. I can blame cold weather for some of that, but certainly not ALL. So I have been walking more, eating smarter, and typing less. So far, I've walked 4 miles today. I hope to get in another mile before the day is over. I'd rather stay inside and argue with Ron (and others) but it's making me FAT. I'll still post, but not as much.

I haven't had a slice of bread (or pizza) for over two years. It turns into a golf ball right in the middle of my chest. And I was the bread queen, pre-band.

Anyone who has issues with Bill Clinton's morals had best not climb on Rudy's bandwagon. He is no model of propriety himself.

Until 1967, when it was struck down by a federal court ruling, there were miscegenation laws all across the south. Texas used the "one-eighth" rule to determine a person's race. If you had one great-grandparent who was black, then you were black, and could not marry a white person. It was a Virginia couple whose trial for violating the state's law against interracial marriage that made its way to the Supreme Court and eventually made it possible for people of any race to marry. Now we just need to work on achieving the same rights for gay and lesbian couples.

Yeah....he was - by the Landmark Legal Foundation, an ultra-conservative group of Republicans with financial ties to oil and big business.

It's normal to feel like your best friend has died. Truth is, if you are successful with the band, it will be because you can no longer eat like a starving, third-world refugee. No more bread. Get over it. No pizza, pasta, cake or rice (for me, anyway). I can eat half an order of nachos. I can eat 4 small meatballs in sauce (no spaghetti, no salad, no breadsticks). I can eat tuna, but chicken gives me trouble sometimes. You can live quite nicely without meat - really, you can. There is lots of protein in skim milk, low-fat cheese, and other foods. Life without cheesecake is still better than life with 100 extra pounds to drag around.

Works for me. Your internet connection is obviously okay, else you wouldn't be posting here. Their site may have been having some problems. Happens to the best of them from time to time. If there are tons of people already on a site, you won't be able to access it. Try, try again.

I saw a great one yesterday. It had a female cartoonish figure and underneath it said, "Girls Kick Butt". I like that a LOT.

Do you need another grandmother, Wheetsin? I have tons of experience and impeccable references.

I do wish you the best of luck, but just wanted to mention here that the insurance company is not the "bad guy". They would be happy to provide coverage for WLS, if only your employer was willing to pay the higher premiums to cover it. Employers negotiate lower premiums by opting to exclude/limit certain things - like WLS or drugs, drugs for ED (Viagra, etc), mental health inpatient care, drug and alcohol rehab, etc. Just because Medicaid/Medicare patients may be eligible for WLS does not mean they receive an all around higher standard of care. Medicare patients, last I heard, were having their coverage for fills denied, although Medicare paid for the band.

My mother had a friend whose infant grandchild was killed, riding in Grandma's lap while she drove. There was an accident - not even a major collision - but it was fatal for the baby.

I think they came pretty close to getting beaten. Their vehicles were pelted with rocks and I think they were genuinely frightened. Serves them right. I loved the woman at the gas station who asked them if they were gay and did they come to a hick town lookin' to be beaten up? Alabama does seem to be the butt of a lot of redneck jokes. But don't forget Arkansas' unofficial motto....thank God for Mississippi.

My state requires vaccination against Hepatitis B, and that virus is primarily transmitted via sex. No one raised a hue and cry when it became a mandatory vaccine. I don't understand the difference between the Hep B vaccine and HPV, as far as promoting sexual behavior. But to answer your question, of course I would endore a vaccine for HIV/AIDS. But you gotta remember....I'm a liberal.

The FDA has approved a vaccine for human papillomavirus, a sexually transmitted disease that is responsible for about 70 percent of cervical cancer cases. Females between 9 and 26 can get vaccinated. Will you get the vaccine? Will you get your daughter vaccinated? Should schools require that girls be vaccinated?

Kitty....that's terrible news about/for your grandmother. What rotten luck! The first date in 40 or 50 years and the jerk gives you an STD! I think anyone is entitled to get the vaccine if they are willing to pay for it. The point being that if you are already infected, it won't do you any good. And by the age of 28, most people either know they have it or are less likely to be exposed. If I were to find myself single and dating tomorrow, I would get it. You are right....they should market it to old ladies who are "suddenly single". Most of us have had less exposure than the average 20 year old!

In Texas the plan is to make the vaccine mandatory for girls in the 6th grade (and older). I hope that by the time your daughters are 11 or 12 years old you have discussed sex with them, at least on some level. Remember that many girls begin to menstruate before the 6th grade. It would be AWFUL for them to wake up one day to blood on their panties and have no idea what was happening. I have known women that had that happen to them and they were terrified.

I take Estrogen and haven't noticed a thing - seriously. It doesn't seem to have any effect on me at all. I have taken it, off and on, for a long time. Severe Osteoporosis runs in my family and my doctor thinks the benefits outweigh the risks of HRT in my case. I don't know where I am, menopause-wise. I had a partial hysterectomy when I was in my 30's, but kept my ovaries. Without loss of menses as a measuring stick, I don't know how you tell. I've never had a hot flash. Are there other signs?

I think it was the "NASCAR Sucks" that really got to them. I think they should have added another car: "WWF IS FOR PANSIES".

I saw a sticker on a horse trailer last week. It said "If you can read this, you need to get your face out of my horse's ass". I have no bumper stickers on my car. No ribbons. No decals. I am not ashamed of my politics or my religious beliefs, but I don't know the general population well enough to share with them.

For the same reason they charge 99 cents for a man's dress shirt at the laundry, and $3.99 for a woman's blouse. And our clothes are generally smaller and less labor-intensive.

What I remember most about Jenny Jones is that she hosted a guy who wanted to hook up with a secret crush (another guy), and the "surprised" guest was so indignant, he killed the would-be lover. Ambush journalism at its worst.

First of all, there is no evidence that the vaccine caused the condition. I quote from your source: "The condition also can occur spontaneously. Indeed, the reports don’t exceed the numbers expected to occur naturally each year — the so-called background rate, the FDA said." Secondly, mandatory vaccinations have wiped out Smallpox, Polio, Diptheria, Whooping Cough, and Tetnus in the US - all once-dreaded diseases that killed thousands each year. My brother contracted Whooping Cough when he was a baby and almost died. When a vaccine became available, my mother could not have me innoculated fast enough. The same for Polio. Epidemics of Polio swept across the US, crippling and killing children around the time I was born. The last Polio epidemic in the United States was in 1979, when an outbreak occurred among the Amish in several Midwest states, by the way. The Amish do not believe in having their children vaccinated. Below is a picture of an iron lung. This particular device was donated to the CDC by the family of Mr. Barton Hebert of Covington, Louisiana. The machine kept Mr. Hebert, who suffered from Polio, alive from the late 1950s until his death in 2003. I'm betting that he wished he could have had the option to be vaccinated against the disease. Vaccination....it's a GOOD thing.