Jump to content
IGNORED

Maybe some Protestants/Non-Catholics can answer......


Hoddie

Recommended Posts

  • 1 month later...

  • Group:  Members *
  • Followers:  8
  • Topic Count:  176
  • Topics Per Day:  0.07
  • Content Count:  870
  • Content Per Day:  0.35
  • Reputation:   330
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  06/23/2017
  • Status:  Offline
  • Birthday:  01/22/1968

On 2016-12-4 at 11:56 AM, Hoddie said:

A question from the Catholics here on Worthy Christian.....

Can you tell/show us where you got your Canon of Scripture?

 

I'm talking about the Canonical books that are those books which have been acknowledged as belonging to the list of books considerd to be inspired and to contain a rule of faith and morals.

This question has been asked on numerous occasions in the past, and more recently in the now closed Lourdes thread. Many have claimed to have answered this question, but have failed to show any historical or Scriptural evidence to back it up. Back on the last page (pg.8) Hazard made an intersting comment coming from someone that adheres to the sola scriptura doctrine. as Follows.

 

Now if the bible does not give a list if the books that belong in the bible as Hazard states, how do Sola Scripturists determine that the books that are in the bible truly belong there? From a Protestant/nondenominational perspective, and if its not in the bible, by who's or what authority determined it?

Do those of you that beleive the bible alone holds all truth, and is sufficient as a sole rule of faith agree with Hazard? If so, doesn't this contradict the premise of Sola Scriptura?

 

Peace

 

 

MORE than happy to answer this.

The cannon of Scripture was miraculously compiled by GOD.

 

It cannot be proven that the Catholic Church is solely responsible for the gathering and selection of the New Testament books. In fact, it can be shown that the New Testament books were gathered into one volume and were in circulation long before the Catholic Church claims to have taken its action in 390 at the council of Hippo.

God did not give councils the authority to select His sacred books, nor does He expect men to receive His sacred books only because of councils or on the basis of councils. It takes no vote or sanction of a council to make the books of the Bible authoritative. Men were able to rightly discern which books were inspired before the existence of ecclesiastical councils and men can do so today. A council of men in 390 with no divine authority whatever, supposedly took upon itself the right to state which books were inspired, and Catholics argue, "We can accept the Bible only on the authority of the Catholic Church."

Can we follow such reasoning?
 

the catholic "church" mearly defined what IT would use as the Bible, NOT what the Bible was.

 

This is a very good sermon on the Bible, and includes HOW it was compiled. 

 

 

If the Bible is a Catholic book, why does it nowhere mention the Catholic Church? Why is there no mention of a pope, a cardinal, an archbishop, a parish priest, a nun, or a member of any other Catholic order? If the Bible is a Catholic book, why is auricular confession, indulgences, prayers to the saints, adoration of Mary, veneration of relics and images, and many other rites and ceremonies of the Catholic Church, left out of it?

If the Bible is a Catholic book, how can Catholics account for the passage, "A bishop then, must be blameless, married but once, reserved, prudent, of good conduct, hospitable, a teacher...He should rule well his own household, keeping his children under control and perfectly respectful. For if a man cannot rule his own household, how is he to take care of the church of God?" (1 Tim. 3:2, 4-5). The Catholic Church does not allow a bishop to marry, while the Bible says "he must be married." Furthermore, if the Bible is a Catholic book, why did they write the Bible as it is, and feel the necessity of putting footnotes at the bottom of the page in effort to keep their subject from believing what is in the text?

  • Loved it! 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

  • Group:  Advanced Member
  • Followers:  6
  • Topic Count:  2
  • Topics Per Day:  0.00
  • Content Count:  337
  • Content Per Day:  0.13
  • Reputation:   214
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  01/11/2017
  • Status:  Offline

Didn't even finish reading your comment.

 

Tell me this??

What church was around in 325?

 

OR

What church was around when the Bible was put together?

 

 

Edited by Fran C
Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Advanced Member
  • Followers:  6
  • Topic Count:  2
  • Topics Per Day:  0.00
  • Content Count:  337
  • Content Per Day:  0.13
  • Reputation:   214
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  01/11/2017
  • Status:  Offline

On 6/25/2017 at 5:12 AM, KiwiChristian said:

 

MORE than happy to answer this.

The cannon of Scripture was miraculously compiled by GOD.

 

It cannot be proven that the Catholic Church is solely responsible for the gathering and selection of the New Testament books. In fact, it can be shown that the New Testament books were gathered into one volume and were in circulation long before the Catholic Church claims to have taken its action in 390 at the council of Hippo.

God did not give councils the authority to select His sacred books, nor does He expect men to receive His sacred books only because of councils or on the basis of councils. It takes no vote or sanction of a council to make the books of the Bible authoritative. Men were able to rightly discern which books were inspired before the existence of ecclesiastical councils and men can do so today. A council of men in 390 with no divine authority whatever, supposedly took upon itself the right to state which books were inspired, and Catholics argue, "We can accept the Bible only on the authority of the Catholic Church."

Can we follow such reasoning?
 

the catholic "church" mearly defined what IT would use as the Bible, NOT what the Bible was.

 

This is a very good sermon on the Bible, and includes HOW it was compiled. 

 

 

If the Bible is a Catholic book, why does it nowhere mention the Catholic Church? Why is there no mention of a pope, a cardinal, an archbishop, a parish priest, a nun, or a member of any other Catholic order? If the Bible is a Catholic book, why is auricular confession, indulgences, prayers to the saints, adoration of Mary, veneration of relics and images, and many other rites and ceremonies of the Catholic Church, left out of it?

If the Bible is a Catholic book, how can Catholics account for the passage, "A bishop then, must be blameless, married but once, reserved, prudent, of good conduct, hospitable, a teacher...He should rule well his own household, keeping his children under control and perfectly respectful. For if a man cannot rule his own household, how is he to take care of the church of God?" (1 Tim. 3:2, 4-5). The Catholic Church does not allow a bishop to marry, while the Bible says "he must be married." Furthermore, if the Bible is a Catholic book, why did they write the Bible as it is, and feel the necessity of putting footnotes at the bottom of the page in effort to keep their subject from believing what is in the text?

Read some more as I was scrolling.

 

So where in the Bible is the name of a church??

And, what became of that church?

 

Our dislike for the C C makes us blind to history.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Advanced Member
  • Followers:  6
  • Topic Count:  2
  • Topics Per Day:  0.00
  • Content Count:  337
  • Content Per Day:  0.13
  • Reputation:   214
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  01/11/2017
  • Status:  Offline

On 3/14/2017 at 4:29 PM, No124get1952 said:

Since the discussion up to this point has been the justification of the Protestant canon of Scripture, how about we apply the same standards to the Catholic canon of scripture? I submit that there is knowledge to be gained by learning how the Catholic Bible came into existence.

I am curious. Because I find the topic to diffuse the primary focus of the Bible, which is the redemptive work of Christ on the cross, his subsequent burial and resurrection. It smacks of the effort to prove one group of Christians wrong and another group of Christians right. When considered in the eternal perspective, both Catholics and Protestants have largely spread the Gospel of Jesus Christ throughout the world....as Jesus commanded.

Just got here.

It sounds like there are two different Bible's.

There's one Bible that the C C put together.

The Protestant church removed seven of these books.

Has the Why been stated?

Edited by Fran C
  • Loved it! 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  0
  • Topic Count:  10
  • Topics Per Day:  0.04
  • Content Count:  4,019
  • Content Per Day:  17.32
  • Reputation:   5,183
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  07/30/2023
  • Status:  Offline

On 8/23/2017 at 6:03 AM, Fran C said:

Just got here.

It sounds like there are two different Bible's.

There's one Bible that the C C put together.

The Protestant church removed seven of these books.

Has the Why been stated?

If you do your research, you'll find there are a lot more than two canons of scripture.  Personally, I find the Protestant Canon of 66 books to be sufficient.  That doesn't mean I don't find truth, inspiration, and pertinent explanations in other books referenced by the 66 book Bible we use.  It's important to separate these books from Gnostic writings which are heretical, in my opinion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Advanced Member
  • Followers:  2
  • Topic Count:  14
  • Topics Per Day:  0.01
  • Content Count:  364
  • Content Per Day:  0.15
  • Reputation:   80
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  09/02/2017
  • Status:  Offline

Many people forget that it's not our job to preserve bible but it's God's duty to do it because he promised to do it .

Psalms 12:6-7

They were preserved with manuscripts which were translated to english and finished in 1611 as King James Version during 7 years of translation .

If you find something contradicting LXX you can just throw it away because Jesus himself was reading it and calling it Scriptures and we know that God can't lie .

Many of non cannonical books will have contradictions with LXX.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  0
  • Topic Count:  10
  • Topics Per Day:  0.04
  • Content Count:  4,019
  • Content Per Day:  17.32
  • Reputation:   5,183
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  07/30/2023
  • Status:  Offline

Psalm 12:6-7 - King James Version (KJV)

6 The words of the Lord are pure words: as silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times.

7 Thou shalt keep them, O Lord, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever.

It is hilarious to what lengths KJV-Only folks go to argue against newer and more accurate translations.  The Jews who wrote the Old Testament didn't write in Elizabethan English, which would not be invented for another 1000+ years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

  • Group:  Members *
  • Followers:  8
  • Topic Count:  176
  • Topics Per Day:  0.07
  • Content Count:  870
  • Content Per Day:  0.35
  • Reputation:   330
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  06/23/2017
  • Status:  Offline
  • Birthday:  01/22/1968

It cannot be proven that the Catholic Church is solely responsible for the gathering and selection of the New Testament books. In fact, it can be shown that the New Testament books were gathered into one volume and were in circulation long before the Catholic Church claims to have taken its action in 390 at the council of Hippo.

God did not give councils the authority to select His sacred books, nor does He expect men to receive His sacred books only because of councils or on the basis of councils. It takes no vote or sanction of a council to make the books of the Bible authoritative. Men were able to rightly discern which books were inspired before the existence of ecclesiastical councils and men can do so today. A council of men in 390 with no divine authority whatever, supposedly took upon itself the right to state which books were inspired, and Catholics argue, "We can accept the Bible only on the authority of the Catholic Church." Can we follow such reasoning?
 

Long before the council of hippo "gave us the bible", Origen, born A.D. 185 and died A.D. 254, named ALL the books of the Bible in his writings and  Eusebius, 270 A.D., lists ALL of the books of the NT.


The Old Testament books were gathered into one volume and were translated from Hebrew into Greek long before Christ came to earth.

When the apostles wrote the New Testament documents they were inspired by the power of the Holy Spirit.  There wasn't any real issue of whether or not they were authentic.   Their writings did not need to be deemed worthy of inclusion in the Canon of Scripture by a later group of men in the so-called Roman Catholic Church.  To make such a claim is, in effect, to usurp the natural power and authority of God himself.

The Christian church merely recognizes the Word of God (John 10:27).  The authenticity of the New Testament documents rests in the inspiration of God through the apostles. It does not rest in the declaration of the Catholic Church. 
 

Quiet simply GOD compiled the Bible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Members *
  • Followers:  8
  • Topic Count:  176
  • Topics Per Day:  0.07
  • Content Count:  870
  • Content Per Day:  0.35
  • Reputation:   330
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  06/23/2017
  • Status:  Offline
  • Birthday:  01/22/1968

On 8/23/2017 at 10:03 PM, Fran C said:

There's one Bible that the C C put together.

The Protestant church removed seven of these books.

Has the Why been stated?

Rubbish. the catholic organisation ADDED these anti-Christian books!

The 7 books support Roman Catholicism. The remaining 66 contradict Roman Catholicism. 

 

  • They are not, and have never been, in the Jewish canon.
  • Josephus explicitly excluded them from his list.
  • Philo (20 B.C.-50 A.D.) neither mentions or quotes them.
  • They were never quoted or alluded to by Jesus Christ or any of the apostles. The sermapocryphal events.
  • Jewish scholars meeting at the Council of Jabneh did not recognize them.
  • Most Church Fathers in fact rejected them.
  • None of the Apocrypha claim inspiration or divine authority.
  • Many of the Apocryphal books contain historical, geographical, and chronological errors.
  • Many of the Apocryphal books teach heresy, contrary to the Word of God.
  • Their literary style is legendary and fantasy. Some stories are grotesque and demonic.
  • They lack the power and distinctive elements of the Word of God.
  • The sermons in the Book of Acts, which outline Jewish history, do not included apocryphal events.
  • Neither their authors nor the circumstances of their writings are known.

According to the Catholic Encyclopedia, St. Jerome was hesitant to include most of the apocryphal books in the canon, due to numerous errors. Even after he did concede to include them (in the fourth century), they were not decreed to be inspired scripture until April 8, 1546 at the Council of Trent. So for 1100 years, they were part of the canon, but not officially scripture. The reason for this is again, because of the numerous errors.

It appears they were ultimately accepted at Trent, because without doing so, the Catholic Church had no scripture upon which to base the doctrine of purgatory, invocation and intercession of the saints, the worship of angels, the redemption of souls after death, etc.  In fact, if you'll look at the Catholic Encyclopedia, you'll find discussion of "problems" or "errors" with most of the apocryphal books. 

 

Judith falsely states that Nebuchadnezzar reigns over the Assyrians,whereas he ruled Babylon instead.Torbit could not have witnessed the division of Israel into the northern and southern kingdoms in 931BC(Tor1:4),and have been deported 200 years later in 734BC(Tor1:10).  Tobit 4:11 and Tobit 12:9 state that giving money forgives sins. This contradicts Christs' work on the cross. Jesus and the apostles quote 260 times from the 35 out of 39 OT books, yet they NEVER quoted the apocrypha.


 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...