V
VWcrazy
Guest
Yes. The topic is the canon and you stated that Jesus affirmed the Bible yet fail to show exactly Book, Chapter, and Verse where this happened.No. The topic is the canon, not sola scriptura.
Yes. The topic is the canon and you stated that Jesus affirmed the Bible yet fail to show exactly Book, Chapter, and Verse where this happened.No. The topic is the canon, not sola scriptura.
I was responding to TriuneUnity’s post belowThanks TLara, but we know that. We are discussing the canon and history of the Bible. It was my hope we might could educate some of the Protestants who do not understand how the Bible came to be one complete book.![]()
The Bible doesn’t have to give itself authority. It’s authoritative simply because it is the word of God. God doesn’t need anyone to confirm the authority of His words other than himself. Jesus, primarily, is where we can draw God’s authority on the scriptures from. I know what you’re trying to say, of course.
The distinction is Word and word. Christ is the Word of the Father; the Scriptures are the word of the Triune God.Please correct me if I’m wrong but the Holy Bible is not the word of God! The word of God is our Savior Jesus Christ. The Holy Bible is is an inspired collection of accounts that men wrote under the guidance of the Holy Spirit.
1 In the beginning was the Word: and the Word was with God: and the Word was God.
No. What I stated was that Jesus affirmed that the Scriptures were the word of God. I said nothing about a list of books. I was asked how we know the Scriptures are the word of God.Yes. The topic is the canon and you stated that Jesus affirmed the Bible yet fail to show exactly Book, Chapter, and Verse where this happened.
Being an expert is not necessary, but you’ve seen some of the sola scripturists I’ve discussed the Bible with and they don’t have a clue how it came to be.I’m reading F. F. Bruce’s the Canon of Scripture as we speak!
I will admit, however, that the canon is not my area of expertise.
Melito, bishop of Sardis, an ancient city of Asia Minor (see Rev 3), c. 170 AD produced the first known Christian attempt at an Old Testament canon. His list maintains the Septuagint order of books but contains only the Old Testament protocanonicals minus the Book of Esther.
The Council of Laodicea, c. 360, produced a list of books similar to today’s canon. This was one of the Church’s earliest decisions on a canon.
Pope Damasus, 366-384, in his Decree, listed the books of today’s canon.
The Council of Rome, 382, was the forum which prompted Pope Damasus’ Decree.
Bishop Exuperius of Toulouse wrote to Pope Innocent I in 405 requesting a list of canonical books. Pope Innocent listed the present canon.
The Council of Hippo, a local north Africa council of bishops created the list of the Old and New Testament books in 393 which is the same as the Roman Catholic list today.
The Council of Carthage, a local north Africa council of bishops created the same list of canonical books in 397. This is the council which many Protestant and Evangelical Christians take as the authority for the New Testament canon of books. The Old Testament canon from the same council is identical to Roman Catholic canon today. Another Council of Carthage in 419 offered the same list of canonical books.
Since the Roman Catholic Church does not define truths unless errors abound on the matter, Roman Catholic Christians look to the Council of Florence, an ecumenical council in 1441 for the first definitive list of canonical books.
The final infallible definition of canonical books for Roman Catholic Christians came from the Council of Trent in 1556 in the face of the errors of the Reformers who rejected seven Old Testament books from the canon of scripture to that time.
What is odd, I think, is the way that the sacramentarians only argue the issue of Scripture many times to simply spite the Catholic Church. Even Luther acknowledged the debt all of Christendom owes to the Church of Rome.Being an expert is not necessary, but you’ve seen some of the sola scripturists I’ve discussed the Bible with and they don’t have a clue how it came to be.
I bought a book that was, of course cheap, and a quick read that was very interesting. I found it online if you want to read it. Free is better than cheap! It’s called “Where we got the Bible: Our Debt to the Catholic Church”.
To read basic information about the canon, just do a search online. There’s plenty of information. I usually use the following:
Sie sind willkommen.What is odd, I think, is the way that the sacramentarians only argue the issue of Scripture many times to simply spite the Catholic Church. Even Luther acknowledged the debt all of Christendom owes to the Church of Rome.
I’ll check out that link, Prod! Danke.
Not to be too picky, but the correct response would be “Bitte”.Sie sind willkommen
Hey that’s the best Babel fish came up with!Not to be too picky, but the correct response would be “Bitte”.
*Ethiopiac Canon of Eighty One (Broader Canon) * has a number of books that are recognized as canonical, but omitted from Catholic Bibles, on the grounds that they are not canonical, despite their canonical status.Do you know of any other books that are not in there now that could be included?
I don’t know if my answer would only speak for me or if it would also speak for the other 32,999 Protestant denominations so therefore I would best not answer.Many discussions on these forums evolved around the authority of the Bible. The Bible does not give authority to itself, nor does it explain how it became one complete book.
I’d like to hear Protestants explanations of how the individual letters and epistles came to be one complete book. I know it was God inspired or breathed, what I’m looking for is what instruments (men or councils) on earth did God use to bring all those books together to become the canon of the Bible as we know it today?
Please provide who, when and where as best of your ability.
Uh, emmm, uh…did I miss something… ?**So, now, we have the official Bible of today with 66 books with an addition of the 14 books of the Apocrypha. **