Canon of Scripture

[mgrfin]

The canon was established by God, not the church. The church may have recognized the canon but it’s is certainly not the author of the canon.

QUOTE]

Up to this post you sounded reasonably intelligent. Now, you tell us God established the canon. And I am somewhat flabberghasted.

Please tell me when He did this? Did He write it down for us? Or to whom did He tell this?

peace

 

[Pwrlftr]

Up to this post you sounded reasonably intelligent. Now, you tell us God established the canon. And I am somewhat flabberghasted.

Please tell me when He did this? Did He write it down for us? Or to whom did He tell this?

peace

The canon is a collection of inspired books, right? The inspiration came from God, not the church.

The books that God inspired would be part of His canon regardless of any decision made by the church. That is all I am saying.

 

[BrianH]

Pwrlftr;2981606:

The canon was established by God, not the church. The church may have recognized the canon but it’s is certainly not the author of the canon.

QUOTE]

Up to this post you sounded reasonably intelligent. Now, you tell us God established the canon. And I am somewhat flabberghasted.

Please tell me when He did this? Did He write it down for us? Or to whom did He tell this?

peace

Is what he is saying so different than what you believe?

These books the Church holds to be sacred and canonical
not because she subsequently approved them by her authority after they had been composed by unaided human skill,
nor simply because they contain revelation without error,
but because,
being written under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit,
they have God as their Author,
and were as such committed to the Church.

 

[Pwrlftr]

mgrfin;2981907:

Is what he is saying so different than what you believe?

I think when I used the word “established” in an earlier post I overstated my case and that confused mgrfin. I think when he saw “established” he immediately thought I believed there was some inspired table of contents laying around somewhere.

 

[BrianH]

The canon is a collection of inspired books, right? The inspiration came from God, not the church.

The books that God inspired would be part of His canon regardless of any decision made by the church. That is all I am saying.

I completely agree. Isn’t that the way works?

 

[Philthy]

Hi Pwrlftr

The canon was established by God, not the church.

Ive waded through this entire thread waiting to hear this comment! How do you know this to be true? How were the results of God’s established canon revealed to you?

The church may have recognized the canon but it’s is certainly not the author of the canon.

Time for specifics:
IF the “church” (presumably not the CC) recognized the canon, how and when did it do so? Without a concrete answer to this, I dont believe that you can claim that ANY canon has been set by God or the “church” and that kinda ends the discussion…

 

[Pwrlftr]

Hi Pwrlftr

Ive waded through this entire thread waiting to hear this comment! How do you know this to be true? How were the results of God’s established canon revealed to you?

Time for specifics:
IF the “church” (presumably not the CC) recognized the canon, how and when did it do so? Without a concrete answer to this, I dont believe that you can claim that ANY canon has been set by God or the “church” and that kinda ends the discussion…

Read my previous posts as I have attempted to clarify what I meant. If you have the same questions let me know and I’ll try to answer them. See post 202.

 

[Pwrlftr]

Read my previous posts (#202) as I have attempted to clarify what I meant. If you have the same questions let me know and I’ll try to answer them.

 

[Philthy]

The canon is a collection of inspired books, right? The inspiration came from God, not the church.

The books that God inspired would be part of His canon regardless of any decision made by the church. That is all I am saying.

Unfortunately you are also saying nothing of substance.
Are you prepared to commit that an actual canon exists and is known by the faithful or not? IF not, what was the point of God inspiring Scripture without anyone recognizing it as inspired?
IF you are commiting to a canon, how and when, exactly, did God reveal it to you?
Time to commit! :yup:

 

[Philthy]

Read my previous posts as I have attempted to clarify what I meant. If you have the same questions let me know and I’ll try to answer them. See post 202.

Post 202 is extraordinarily brief and answers very little IMHO.

Do you know the contents of holy Scripture or not? Does anyone?

 

[BrianH]

Plithy
It is highly disturbing to watch a Christian try to talk another Christian out of believing in the canon of scripture.
This is the second thread tonight that you have attempted to do that.
It is an unusual apologetic tactic and one I am quite sure that has no support in the Catechism or any Catholic document I have read.

BH

 

[jmcrae]

The canon was established by God, not the church.

The Church (meaning that which Christ established, with Peter as its first Pope and the Apostles as its first Bishops) is described by St. Paul in I Corinthians 12 as the Body of Christ.

The Catholic Church is the physical interface by means of which Christ communicates with us, so while it is certainly true that God established the canon of the Scriptures, He communicated this information to us through His Church - that is, through certain Councils and Popes of the Catholic Church. It did not fall from Heaven fully formed.

 

[Pwrlftr]

The Church (meaning that which Christ established, with Peter as its first Pope and the Apostles as its first Bishops) is described by St. Paul in I Corinthians 12 as the Body of Christ.

The Catholic Church is the physical interface by means of which Christ communicates with us, so while it is certainly true that God established the canon of the Scriptures, He communicated this information to us through His Church - that is, through certain Councils and Popes of the Catholic Church. It did not fall from Heaven fully formed.

I can agree that the church was one of the means, perhaps the means, God used to communicate his scriptures.

I shouldn’t have used “established” in my post as it probably implied something I didn’t intend.

 

[mgrfin]

I can agree that the church was one of the means, perhaps the means, God used to communicate his scriptures.

I shouldn’t have used “established” in my post as it probably implied something I didn’t intend.

An honest man. A very rare thing.

peace

 

[Pwrlftr]

An honest man. A very rare thing.

peace

You caught me on a good day.

 

[Pwrlftr]

(For philthy)

I believe that the church received the canon. The church did not create the canon nor does it somehow exist above the canon.

Although it would be “handy” if the church were infallible, I see no reason to grant that the church is infallible to be in a position to receive the canon. The Holy Spirit had worked among the early church in providing them with the books of the New Testament and the church was likewise used to spread the canon.

I fully realize that some reading this will believe that an infallible authority must exist for there to be knowledge of the canon but I don’t believe this to be true or necessary now since it wasn‘t true or necessary in the past. During the old testament times, the Jews had a canon of Scripture and they had their canon of scripture despite not having an infallible authority.

First century Christians had the Old Testament and they had certainty as well. We see this in 2 Timothy 3:15.
2Timothy 3:15-16:

….and how from infancy you have known the holy Scriptures, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus.

How did Timothy know what was part of holy Scripture w/out an infallible authority telling him which books were scripture and which weren’t?

We also see in
Romans 3:2:

Much in every way! First of all, they (the Jews) have been entrusted with the very words of God (oracles/scriptures).

The Jews were entrusted w/ the scriptures, yet they had no infallible magisterial to declare to them what was and what wasn’t scripture. Obviously if they were entrusted w/ the scriptures they had to recognize what was and what wasn’t part of the oracles of God.

How could Timothy or the Jews know the Scriptures were the words of God without an infallible Church council declaring which books were canonical?

It appears that one doesn’t necessarily have to have an infallible council or an infallible authority declaring what is and what isn’t scripture to have certainty of the canon. I don’t recall any entry in the catechism or from a council declaring the Jewish OT leadership to be infallible. If you know of one, please post it.

I see no reason that the scriptures have to have an infallible body to declare the canon. It wasn’t needed before Trent for either Christians or the OT Jews, so why is it needed now?

As Dr. R.C. Sproul says, I believe we have a fallible list of infallible books. That said, I don’t believe there is an error in the canon nor do I see a need for an infallible church/authority to give us the canon.

Now we get down to how Timothy or you or I can have “certainty” the Old Testament was the word of God? Quite simply it is God’s sovereign power that reveals the canon to His church. My certainty in the canon is not based on whatever the early church did but my faith in the providence of God to make His scriptures known to us today.

God certainly used various means in establishing His canon but as we have seen in OT times those means are not required to be infallible for one to know they are reading or hearing the Word of God in the scriptures.

Hopefully you won’t judge the above to be “nothing of substance” and will accept the above as meeting your requirements for being “committed” to my position.

 

[Philthy]

Plithy
It is highly disturbing to watch a Christian try to talk another Christian out of believing in the canon of scripture.
This is the second thread tonight that you have attempted to do that.
It is an unusual apologetic tactic and one I am quite sure that has no support in the Catechism or any Catholic document I have read.

BH

Hi Brian -

Im not trying to talk another Christian out of believing in the canon. Quite the opposite. I am trying to take a step back so that we can move forward toward a better understanding of why we accept the canon we accept and why pwrlftr accepts the canon he accepts. Its all off-topic, however, and probably should be moved to another thread.

 

[Philthy]

Pwrlftr:

I believe that the church received the canon.

Awesome - I agree! Could you please tell me what you mean by “the church” in this statement? How and when, exactly, did “the church” REVEAL what it had “received” ? It seems very important to us effectively communicating.

The church did not create the canon nor does it …exist above (it).

OK, but again there are some ambiguities, much like there are ambiguities in discussing how Scripture was “created”. Paul “created” Scripture by writing it even though it was God who inspired him. I dont see any dichotomy between the Church creating the canon and God inspiring it, but perhaps you do.

The Holy Spirit had worked among the early church in providing them with the books of the New Testament and the church was likewise used to spread the canon.

We need details here. How and when did “the church” do this exactly?

I…realize…some…believe that an infallible authority must exist for there to be knowledge of the canon but I don’t …since it wasn‘t true or necessary in the past. …the Jews had a canon of Scripture …despite not having an infallible authority.

Its probably a mistake to:
A) think that the Jews had no authority structure in place - at the very least they had a priesthood and Moses’ seat. There were authority structures in place (with bonafides approved by Christ).
B) ignore that the Jews were a single nation, unlike Christians.
C) ignore that the Holy Spirit had not yet come during OT times while Jesus promised the HS to the Apostles specifically to “lead them to all truth”.

First century Christians had the Old Testament and they had certainty as well. We see this in 2 Timothy 3:15.
How did Timothy know what was part of holy Scripture w/out an infallible authority telling him which books were scripture and which weren’t?

Paul says Timothy can be certain because of who he learned them from, not that the Scriptures were somehow “self authenticating”

The Jews were entrusted w/ the scriptures, yet they had no infallible magisterial to declare to them what was and what wasn’t scripture. Obviously if they were entrusted w/ the scriptures they had to recognize what was and what wasn’t part of the oracles of God.

The historical FACT that they held a council in 90 AD (Jamnia?) for the expressed purpose of determining the canon with established criteria for doing so would seem to strongly argue against your conclusion, no?

It appears that one doesn’t necessarily have to have an infallible council or an infallible authority declaring what is and what isn’t scripture to have certainty of the canon.

Correct. You could also receive personal revelation. Apart from that I dont see how you could determine it.

I see no reason that the scriptures have to have an infallible body to declare the canon. It wasn’t needed before Trent for either Christians or the OT Jews, so why is it needed now?

Well, just as a reality check, how did you determine the veracity of the canon revealed to you?

As Dr. R.C. Sproul says, I believe we have a fallible list of infallible books…That said, I don’t believe there is an error in the canon

Of course not, but that goes against the very claim of RC Sproul,so you DONT agree with him. You have yet to reveal WHY you dont believe there is an error in your canon - other than personal opinion.

how (can) you or I can have “certainty” the OT was the word of God? Quite simply it is God’s sovereign power that reveals the canon to His church. My certainty in the canon is not based on whatever the early church did but my faith in the providence of God to make His scriptures known to us today.

Again, it sounds good, but you are ignoring 1500 years of “today” for Christianity. When did “the early church” transition to the “today” of your statement?

God certainly used various means in establishing His canon but as we have seen in OT times those means are not required to be infallible *for one to know they are reading or hearing the Word of God *in the scriptures.

I would articulate that a little differently. No infallible interpreter is needed to act in good faith in believing that they are reading…

Hopefully you won’t judge the above to be “nothing of substance” and will accept the above as meeting your requirements for being “committed” to my position

Not at all - Im not competent to judge anyone. Your thoughts are reasonable and you have presented them well. There are some details which need to be filled in, but no one has all the answers.

 

[peary]

I can agree that the church was one of the means, perhaps the means, God used to communicate his scriptures.

I shouldn’t have used “established” in my post as it probably implied something I didn’t intend.

Hopefully, Pwrlftr doesn’t believe that the Bible dropped out of the sky like manna in the desert LOL

And, if God was with the Church and the councils when they decided the Canon of scripture, why would He then leave the Church that He founded? That makes absolutely no sense to me, plus the fact that, even if one were to say that the church apostated at some revisionist historical time because it was sinful, that would go against Christ’s personality as he NEVER abandoned a sinner. That in itself would have been unbiblical from what we know of Christ Himself.

 

[mgrfin]

(For philthy)

I believe that the church received the canon. The church did not create the canon nor does it somehow exist above the canon.

Although it would be “handy” if the church were infallible, I see no reason to grant that the church is infallible to be in a position to receive the canon. The Holy Spirit had worked among the early church in providing them with the books of the New Testament and the church was likewise used to spread the canon.

I fully realize that some reading this will believe that an infallible authority must exist for there to be knowledge of the canon but I don’t believe this to be true or necessary now since it wasn‘t true or necessary in the past. During the old testament times, the Jews had a canon of Scripture and they had their canon of scripture despite not having an infallible authority.

First century Christians had the Old Testament and they had certainty as well. We see this in 2 Timothy 3:15.

How did Timothy know what was part of holy Scripture w/out an infallible authority telling him which books were scripture and which weren’t?

We also see in

The Jews were entrusted w/ the scriptures, yet they had no infallible magisterial to declare to them what was and what wasn’t scripture. Obviously if they were entrusted w/ the scriptures they had to recognize what was and what wasn’t part of the oracles of God.

How could Timothy or the Jews know the Scriptures were the words of God without an infallible Church council declaring which books were canonical?

It appears that one doesn’t necessarily have to have an infallible council or an infallible authority declaring what is and what isn’t scripture to have certainty of the canon. I don’t recall any entry in the catechism or from a council declaring the Jewish OT leadership to be infallible. If you know of one, please post it.

I see no reason that the scriptures have to have an infallible body to declare the canon. It wasn’t needed before Trent for either Christians or the OT Jews, so why is it needed now?

As Dr. R.C. Sproul says, I believe we have a fallible list of infallible books. That said, I don’t believe there is an error in the canon nor do I see a need for an infallible church/authority to give us the canon.

Now we get down to how Timothy or you or I can have “certainty” the Old Testament was the word of God? Quite simply it is God’s sovereign power that reveals the canon to His church. My certainty in the canon is not based on whatever the early church did but my faith in the providence of God to make His scriptures known to us today.

God certainly used various means in establishing His canon but as we have seen in OT times those means are not required to be infallible for one to know they are reading or hearing the Word of God in the scriptures.

Hopefully you won’t judge the above to be “nothing of substance” and will accept the above as meeting your requirements for being “committed” to my position.

Was the canon of Scripture complete when Timothy was writing?
Weren’t there other books still to be written when he wrote what he wrote?

peace