>>17980660
>>17981433
>Members of the Jewish diaspora had already regarded many of the books of the so-called apocrypha as inspired for centuries
Let's suppose for the sake of argument that you proved that somehow. Couldn't those members of the diaspora simply be mistaken? There were unbelievers among the diaspora, last I checked.
>so your assertion that theologians *obviously* regarded them as a secondary inclusion in the Septuagint is tenuous.
It is easy to tell they are a secondary inclusion because none of them exist in the original Hebrew. Whereas the Old Testament itself is still in its original Hebrew and Syriac-Aramaic that it was originally inspired as. God specifically preserved His inspired word (see: 1 Peter 1:23-25, 2 Peter 1:20-21), but not manmade words such as the apocrypha.
>I see no reason why Christians of any ilk should look to them for guidance.
Reading the Old Testament is enough evidence in itself, or should be, that God authored it.

Other peoples' opinions should be irrelevant. In the face of directly reading and hearing it for yourself, a believer will recognize the voice of the Creator from the Bible itself. Therefore, they won't be misled by apocryphal writings, which are manmade and not specifically inspired by God (see 2 Timothy 3:16-17), in the sense stated by Paul and Peter in the New Testament.

"All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works."
(2 Timothy 3:16-17)

"Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.
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 Peter 1:20-21)

>>17874799
Genesis 4:8
"And Cain talked with Abel his brother: and it came to pass, when they were in the field, that Cain rose up against Abel his brother, and slew him."

That by itself seems like a coherent thought to me.

"For this is the message that ye heard from the beginning, that we should love one another.
Not as Cain, who was of that wicked one, and slew his brother. And wherefore slew he him? Because his own works were evil, and his brother's righteous."
- 1 John 3:11-12

"By faith Abel offered unto God a more excellent sacrifice than Cain, by which he obtained witness that he was righteous, God testifying of his gifts: and by it he being dead yet speaketh."
- Hebrews 11:4

>>17871142
>it's a blunt fact that you regard yourself as a grafted on branch to judaism.
Modern "Judaism" has nothing to do with the Biblical Jews though. The Talmud did not exist until the 3rd to 5th century AD.

>>17864394
>IIRC many of those verses aren't even significant
See what Jesus said in the Gospel:

"But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God."
(Matthew 4:4)

>and they're fully explained by cross-contamination between the gospels.
Not exactly. The missing verses are not true parallel passages. Almost all of them occur at different times in Jesus' ministry.

For example, Matthew 18:11 happens significantly earlier than Luke 19:20, which is a verse where Jesus says something similar, but is co-temporal with chapter 20 of Matthew, not chapter 18.

Similarly, Mark 7:16 has Jesus say, "If any man have ears to hear, let him hear." The parallel passage to this teaching is in Matthew 15, which does not have this saying. However, Jesus often said this at other times. This saying is meaningful in its own context in each place and should not just be removed. Similarly with Mark 11:26, which is parallel to Matthew 21.

In addition to these verses being said at different times from their supposed parallel passages, the sayings in question aren't always exactly the same either. In Matthew 17:21, Jesus said, "this kind goeth not out (οὐκ ἐκπορεύεται) but by prayer and fasting." This is slightly different than the statement Jesus also made in Mark 9:29, which says, "this kind can come forth by nothing (οὐδενὶ δύναται ἐξελθεῖν) but by prayer and fasting." The two sayings are not exactly the same, nor do the omitted words/verses occur at the same time.

In the case of Matthew 23:14, which is the only remaining possible "parallel passage" here, the words are not exactly the same there either. Only Matthew 23 includes the words, "Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites!" at this place in Jesus' speech. He may have also said the same thing more than once during the course of His speech to the multitude. This would make Matthew 23:14 unique as well, meaning every verse mentioned is unique.

>>17824665
>Try making that fit with the calendar we use now.
454 BC to AD 30 is 483 years. In the 20th year of Artaxerxes, the order for Jerusalem to be rebuilt was made according to Nehemiah 2:1-8.
>You may start with Daniel 9:25-25. Try making that fit with the calendar we use now.
Artaxerxes became co-rex with his father in 473.

This has a historical basis because Thucydides says that Themistocles was driven from Greece and ended up in the court of Artaxerxes, at a date around 473 BC (presenting a slight discrepancy from Ptolemy's table) which can be satisfactorily explained by letting Ptolemy's date be the year of Xerxes' death.

>This is talking about saved jews aka "original christians", who are christians every bit as much as saved gentiles are.
It's about as many as walk according to this rule, according to Galatians 6:16.

Your view of the previous verse also makes absolutely no sense; it doesn't say anything remotely about "original christians," in that verse. Unfortunately you were so sloppy here that you have made multiple mistakes at the same time in this place, requiring me to point out each one separately. You are somehow managing to be wrong on multiple levels here, anon.

>If christians are now the nation of Israel
I said they are the Israel of God, according to Galatians 6:16. Read more carefully. Israel "of God" refers specifically God's perspective. In God's perspective, the Galatians who walk according to this rule are His people, the elect. In Romans ch. 9 to 11, Paul is talking about his kinsmen according to the flesh. Different context. See also Romans 9:6.

>Israel are the people who trace their legal right back to Jacob, the people whose inheritance is an everlasting physical nation on this earth
Those who are asleep in Christ will inherit it as part of God's people. They will resurrect and inherit it.

The only misapprehension in this statement is the misguided presupposition that the modern synagogue of satan are what they claim to be.