Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
irishcowboy

Process of canonization

Recommended Posts

Guest shiloh357
Canonization is a strictly Roman Catholic process. This is not a Roman Catholic site, for questions about this topic you should go to a Roman Catholic web site or ask an informed Catholic. There are some Catholics here but not many.
But it still should be important to everyone here. It was the Catholics, was it not, who determined which books would appear in scripture.

Hitchey, he is talking about the canonization of saints, not Scripture. The canon of Scripture was being formed long before the Catholic Church came on the scene.

Paul considered Luke's Gospel to be as authoritative as the Old Testament, Peter considered Paul's writings to be Scripture, many of the New Testament epistles were circulated around the various churches such as Ephesians, for example.

In addition, find that by the middle of third century, most of the books we have in the NT were considered Scriopture. The books receiving the most controversy were Heberws, 2 and 3 John, 2 Peter, and James.

The councils of Hippo, Carthage and Laodecia all confirmed the current 27 books we have today in the New Testament as authoritative, before 400 AD.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Canonization is a strictly Roman Catholic process. This is not a Roman Catholic site, for questions about this topic you should go to a Roman Catholic web site or ask an informed Catholic. There are some Catholics here but not many.
But it still should be important to everyone here. It was the Catholics, was it not, who determined which books would appear in scripture.

Hitchey, he is talking about the canonization of saints, not Scripture. The canon of Scripture was being formed long before the Catholic Church came on the scene.

Paul considered Luke's Gospel to be as authoritative as the Old Testament, Peter considered Paul's writings to be Scripture, many of the New Testament epistles were circulated around the various churches such as Ephesians, for example.

In addition, find that by the middle of third century, most of the books we have in the NT were considered Scriopture. The books receiving the most controversy were Heberws, 2 and 3 John, 2 Peter, and James.

The councils of Hippo, Carthage and Laodecia all confirmed the current 27 books we have today in the New Testament as authoritative, before 400 AD.

Thanks alot! I'm glad for having recieved this information.

Where does it say that Paul considered Luke's gospel to be authoritative?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I added a sub title indicating this was a dicussion of how we got our Bibles

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A very good place to find some history of the English Bible is

You are here: Home >> English Bible History

English Bible History

The fascinating story of how we got the Bible in its present form actually starts thousands of years ago, as briefly outlined in our Timeline of Bible Translation History. As a background study, we recommend that you first review our discussion of the Pre-Reformation History of the Bible from 1,400 B.C. to 1,400 A.D., which covers the transmission of the scripture through the original languages of Hebrew and Greek, and the 1,000 years of the Dark & Middle Ages when the Word was trapped in only Latin. Our starting point in this discussion of Bible history, however, is the advent of the scripture in the English language with the

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The canonization of Scripture is not a topic that can be easily covered, but let me give a brief overview.

I will not talk about the Old Testament much other than to say that Jesus accepted the Old Testament as we have it through His use of it and His calling it the word of God.

The New Testament process (very brief sketch) works this way:

1. Apostles or prophets wrote letters, gospels, and other literature.

2. The church received this work and viewed it as being authoritative for life and practice.

3. Distinctions were made between writings which were helpful, and writings which were Authoritative.

4. Very early on those authoritative books were called Scripture. Paul refers to Luke's writing as Scripture in 1 Timothy and Peter refers to Paul's writings as Scripture in 2 Peter.

5. When heretics begin to gain sway the church wrote down,which documents they were authoritative and which were not. This was not done arbitrarily, but rather had certain criteria, with the main one being its connection to an apostle.

Hope this helps.

www.studyyourbibleonline.com

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The canonization of Scripture is not a topic that can be easily covered, but let me give a brief overview.

I will not talk about the Old Testament much other than to say that Jesus accepted the Old Testament as we have it through His use of it and His calling it the word of God.

The New Testament process (very brief sketch) works this way:

1. Apostles or prophets wrote letters, gospels, and other literature.

2. The church received this work and viewed it as being authoritative for life and practice.

3. Distinctions were made between writings which were helpful, and writings which were Authoritative.

4. Very early on those authoritative books were called Scripture. Paul refers to Luke's writing as Scripture in 1 Timothy and Peter refers to Paul's writings as Scripture in 2 Peter.

5. When heretics begin to gain sway the church wrote down,which documents they were authoritative and which were not. This was not done arbitrarily, but rather had certain criteria, with the main one being its connection to an apostle.

Hope this helps.

www.studyyourbibleonline.com

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...