Dear Protestant: Where Did You Get Your Bible?

[LutheranScholar]

I believe you have just given a good description of the church catholic Jesus claims for his bride. God created all the flowers and while each one is a flower they can all be very different from the other. Put together they make a beautiful bouquet.

Thank you and Amen, Wannano! :tiphat: I believe this to be most certainly true! :extrahappy: The Lord is awesome and His ways truly are beyond our poor senses, though we all too often try to apply the human idea of " logic" to figure things out our way. That is normal, though and I am convinced that the Holy Spirit does meet us where we’re at and does what has to be done to fix our eyes on Him ( He did that for me, but that’s another story).

 

[rcwitness]

\

I think the Holy Spirit met everybody where they were

Yes! Jesus reaches out, and especially to those who gather at His table. At this point, we were all at the same table.

yes and led them to a fuller understanding of where they were

I guess to those who listened and obeyed, like He does in all generations.

God works through people, as we all know and people come to different conclusions and ways that they can live out the Gospel. Where some see chaos, I see an orchestra. Different instruments complementing all the others to make a simple, pleasant tune. People who can’t fully live their lives for the Lord because they disagree with the tenets of their childhood church might find themselves drawn to the theology of another church that simply makes more sense to them. They still have Jesus, but they simply moved to another room in the house ( with apologies and compliments to that man of God, C.S. Lewis, may he rest in peace) where they can be more productive ( or where the Holy Spirit can refine their understanding in a way that most pleases Him).

Well, I don’t want to assume too much here, because you are being vague about things. Though, the term “Tenets” implies principle matters. If there are Tenets of the Church, why would another location, with a different group of individuals call some things important while another group does not? You must not be talking about Traditions, but customs and practices?

Here is a Lutheran understanding on Christians and churches:
All those who confess Jesus Christ as Savior are recognized as “Christians” by the Synod—only God can look into a person’s heart and see whether that person really believes. It is possible to have true and sincere faith in Jesus Christ even while having wrong or incomplete beliefs about other doctrinal issues.

“having wrong or incomplete beliefs about doctrinal issues” is not cause for overreaction in itself. I agree. But when those issues are taken before the Church and still persist AND are taught as though they are true and the Church is wrong is a different story! We all need to learn the wisdom of various matters of faith and morals. And sometimes we need straightening out. Not a big deal, or even problematic.

The LCMS recognizes all Trinitarian church bodies as Christian churches (in contrast to “cults,” which typically reject the doctrine of the Trinity and thus cannot be recognized as Christian).Now you have taken a concept and expanded it to a whole congregation, which necessarily tolerates errors. It’s like saying, we all have errors, just let them be because I don’t want anyone rooting out my errors.

In fact, a primary “objective” listed in the Synod’s Constitution (Article III) is to “work through its official structure toward fellowship with other Christian church bodies” — which explicitly assumes that these “other church bodies” are “Christian” in nature.

lcms.org/faqs/denominations#salvation

Again this is presuming there is discord already among bodies of separate churches. I realize it’s the reality now, but it’s a dysfunction and caused by a fracture in the unity of One Eucharistic celebration and table.

Anyway, I’m okay, you’re okay, just as long as we have the Creeds before us and the Holy Spirit working in our lives.

But Scripture never said anything about Creeds or Councils, right?

Yes, the Catholic Church recognizes a bond of faith and common Baptism. But we will only be perfectly united at the table of His Eucharist.

 

[LutheranScholar]

Yes! Jesus reaches out, and especially to those who gather at His table. At this point, we were all at the same table.
I guess to those who listened and obeyed, like He does in all generations.
Well, I don’t want to assume too much here, because you are being vague about things. Though, the term “Tenets” implies principle matters. If there are Tenets of the Church, why would another location, with a different group of individuals call some things important while another group does not? You must not be talking about Traditions, but customs and practices?

Customs and practices are as often as not grounded in traditions. I believe you guys have Holy Days of Obligation outside of Sunday when you are expected to attend Mass. We are also expected to attend Divine Service every Sunday, but we are not told that we are in a state of mortal sin when we fail to appear. We are, on the other hand, admonished to attend so our faith ( which is renewed and strengthened at the Table of the Lord) might remain strong. I’m sorry if you find my answers vague.* I* think I’m being as clear as a summer night’s sky. The Holy Spirit is Who leads us to all understanding.

“having wrong or incomplete beliefs about doctrinal issues” is not cause for overreaction in itself. I agree. But when those issues are taken before the Church and still persist AND are taught as though they are true and the Church is wrong is a different story! We all need to learn the wisdom of various matters of faith and morals. And sometimes we need straightening out. Not a big deal, or even problematic.

Sure we do. When we need straightening out or rebuke, we go to our elders or whoever else has the authority granted to them to correct our errors. Ultimately, our consciences belong to God and when we find ourselves unproductive or paralyzed in our faith, in danger of losing our faith, the Holy Spirit will direct us to where we need to go.

Now you have taken a concept and expanded it to a whole congregation, which necessarily tolerates errors. It’s like saying, we all have errors, just let them be because I don’t want anyone rooting out my errors.

That is simplistic and not necessarily so. We do have errors and gaps in our understanding ( all of us. Catholics, Protestants and Orthodox alike all have gaps and emphasize different parts of faith to the detriment of certain other parts) and God has given to us the basics we need ( Word and Sacraments) to have fellowship with Him. Do I believe in double predestination? Nope. Did my Presbyterian grandfather? Presumably. Do I expect to meet him in Heaven? Yes, indeed I do!

Again this is presuming there is discord already among bodies of separate churches. I realize it’s the reality now, but it’s a dysfunction and caused by a fracture in the unity of One Eucharistic celebration and table.

Sure is and any corrections will be provided by God in Heaven when we get to Heaven. The Eucharistic Table is rightly shared by those who assent to the doctrines of the church where the Eucharist is being celebrated. Would I participate in a Methodist communion? No, because I don’t encounter Christ in a Methodist context. I don’t assent to Methodist doctrine nor identify myself as such. I absolutely consider them Christians and when we get to Heaven, we will all share in the Heavenly Feast " This is the feast of victory to our God, alleluia." That’s part of our ( LCMS) Sacrament of the Lord’s Supper liturgy. We approach the Throne of Grace in an Evangelical Lutheran context, true, but we approach nonetheless. Jesus invites us and we say a resounding YES to Him :extrahappy:

But Scripture never said anything about Creeds or Councils, right?

Of course it did! Peter’s Confession of faith might well be seen as an early creed. The First Council of Jerusalem is recorded in the Book of Acts.

Yes, the Catholic Church recognizes a bond of faith and common Baptism. But we will only be perfectly united at the table of His Eucharist.

I expect to see you and all of my brothers and sisters here at CAF at that best of Tables in the Kingdom of Heaven! God bless you and Pax Christi Vobiscum!

 

[rcwitness]

Customs and practices are as often as not grounded in traditions. I believe you guys have Holy Days of Obligation outside of Sunday when you are expected to attend Mass. We are also expected to attend Divine Service every Sunday, but we are not told that we are in a state of mortal sin when we fail to appear.

It isn’t just “failing to appear” but failing for a poor reason (laziness, indifference, shame, lesser priorities, etc.)

We are, on the other hand, admonished to attend so our faith ( which is renewed and strengthened at the Table of the Lord) might remain strong. I’m sorry if you find my answers vague.* I* think I’m being as clear as a summer night’s sky. The Holy Spirit is Who leads us to all understanding.

Well, obviously I agree that the Holy Spirit leads to all understanding. The vague parts were what you mention as “disagreement over Tenets of the faith”. That term usually suggests principle matters, right?

Of course it did! Peter’s Confession of faith might well be seen as an early creed. The First Council of Jerusalem is recorded in the Book of Acts.

Now you know, as a Catholic we submit to Councils, and recognize Peter’s role in the Jerusalem Council. But what does the Scriptures say about Councils? What does it say about creeds? Not much. It shows the Apostle had one, and it lead to resolve, but there is no command to convene them or what their authority is.

 

[Peter_J]

Customs and practices are as often as not grounded in traditions. I believe you guys have Holy Days of Obligation outside of Sunday when you are expected to attend Mass. We are also expected to attend Divine Service every Sunday,** but we are not told that we are in a state of mortal sin when we fail to appear**.

We actually aren’t told that either, at least not by the Church. “Internet apologists” may say that (I wouldn’t know, I don’t spend much time on the web ) but what the Church actually says is grave matter.

 

[LutheranScholar]

We actually aren’t told that either, at least not by the Church. “Internet apologists” may say that (I wouldn’t know, I don’t spend much time on the web ) but what the Church actually says is grave matter.

Indeed? That was always my impression: catholicherald.com/stories/Is-Missing-Mass-a-Mortal-Sin,6449, but " what people say" and what is actually on the books might be two totally different things. Of course, we Lutherans regard absence from our Divine Service as no small matter, either: steadfastlutherans.org/2012/06/reasons-for-reverence-in-the-divine-service/, storage.cloversites.com/gloryofchrist/documents/COMMUNION%20EVERY%20SUNDAY.htm . It’s good that your ministry keeps you from spending too much time on the " interwebz." You might find yourself in danger of being regarded as little more than a talking head .

 

[Peter_J]

Now you know, as a Catholic we submit to Councils, and recognize Peter’s role in the Jerusalem Council. But what does the Scriptures say about Councils? What does it say about creeds? Not much. It shows the Apostle had one, and it lead to resolve, but there is no command to convene them or what their authority is.

That’s just what I was thinking.

In my own life, I can still recall my puzzlement when I first encountered the idea of bishops voting at an ecumenical council – and this was when I was in grad school! Before then I had been under the impression that at an ecumenical council all the bishops agreed upon something, just as in the Council of Jerusalem.

 

[Peter_J]

Indeed?

Well, I guess I do spend a certain amount of time here.

But enough about me. I certainly wouldn’t conflate the Catholic Herald with, say, a post on a Catholic blog … but, without having read the whole article, I think the key is the phrase “deliberately fail in this obligation” – essentially a shorthand form of the conditions for mortal sin (full knowledge and full consent).

 

[rcwitness]

That’s just what I was thinking.

In my own life, I can still recall my puzzlement when I first encountered the idea of bishops voting at an ecumenical council – and this was when I was in grad school! Before then I had been under the impression that at an ecumenical council all the bishops agreed upon something, just as in the Council of Jerusalem.

… unless we understand this reference to Counsels.

"Again I say to you, if two of you agree on earth about anything they ask, it will be done for them by my Father in heaven.20For where two or three are gathered in my name, there am I in the midst of them.”

 

[Gabriel_of_12]

I find it interesting to note why the Church finally canonized the bible books?

The bible books were canonized for the Catholic Liturgy of the Church.

After four centuries of Roman laws (that persecuted the Catholic Church) was lifted. The Church, finding herself free to worship in public. Discovered her bible books were transcribed in different languages used in diverse Liturgies. The miracle to some of these books is when the Church found the Gospels and most letters of the apostles were in different languages but transcribed verbatim. Other liturgies were found to be using letters that were apocryphal or not inspired.

This created a storm of events, that the Roman Emperor stepped in and financed a Church council to settle the matter of the Liturgical books, thus the cannon of the bible books was declared in multiple councils and authorized by multiple Popes., in various times because books kept coming under scrutiny or challenged.

What is interesting is that the first official canon of the books of the bible, is the same one Catholic’s have today.

If the bible was originally canonized for the Catholic Liturgical Mass.

What is the purpose for protestants to having a bible who do not have a Liturgy?

 

[benhur]

Great article by Steve Ray: catholicconvert.com/

The quick answer:

The Catholic Church officially determined and set the canon of of the New Testament approximately 400 years after Christianity began. The canon was declared by the body of Catholic bishops at the Council of Carthage (397 A.D.) and confirmed by Pope Boniface (419 A.D.).

Hi Randy,

Of course this is only relevant to the point that that Catholic church of the 4th century is the same as the Catholic church of the 15th ( where P’s" begin"), or the 21st century.

Blessings

 

[MichaelP3]

Hi Randy,

Of course this is only relevant to the point that that Catholic church of the 4th century is the same as the Catholic church of the 15th ( where P’s" begin"), or the 21st century.

Blessings

Exactly what I have been saying in the past how many posts!

 

[Gabriel_of_12]

Hi Randy,

Of course this is only relevant to the point that that Catholic church of the 4th century is the same as the Catholic church of the 15th ( where P’s" begin"), or the 21st century.

Blessings

It is very relevant. The canon of the bible books were geared toward the Catholic Mass prior to the first official canon in the 4th century, and these same bible books are still used in the Catholic Mass today.

So Yes, the same Catholic Liturgy practiced in the 4th century is the same Catholic Liturgy practiced today.

 

[Peter_J]

Hi Randy,

Of course this is only relevant to the point that that Catholic church of the 4th century is the same as the Catholic church of the 15th ( where P’s" begin"), or the 21st century.

Blessings

But isn’t it better to go back and forth trading our respective assertions than … well, whatever other kind of dialogue there is?

 

[Peter_J]

But isn’t it better to go back and forth trading our respective assertions than … well, whatever other kind of dialogue there is?

Okay, maybe not exactly, but you get the idea.

 

[LutheranScholar]

Okay, maybe not exactly, but you get the idea.

Sure. It’s more productive to read what some member of a particular confession actually believes than to read an outsider’s assertion about what they think someone of said confession believes.

 

[dawid]

Hi Randy,

Of course this is only relevant to the point that that Catholic church of the 4th century is the same as the Catholic church of the 15th ( where P’s" begin"), or the 21st century.

Blessings

The Catholic Church instituted by the Christ using Simon Peter and the other apostles and their successors is the same Catholic Church today.

 

[benhur]

Okay, maybe not exactly, but you get the idea.

Hi Pete,

Understand .Thank you.

The OT was the Writ on which Christ and the apostles founded the church, on which they received legitimacy and authority. Can one point to a Jewish council for that canon/authority ? Can one point to any specific sect that claims such authority ?

Blessings

 

[benhur]

The Catholic Church instituted by the Christ using Simon Peter and the other apostles and their successors is the same Catholic Church today.

Hi d,

Yes, and Christ and the apostles were all Jewish, as were the first church communities.

Blessings

 

[JMM1957]

The Old Testament was written by Jewish Prophets inspired by the Holy Spirit. It was accepted as Scripture before Jesus was born and confirmed by Jesus during his time on earth.

The New Testament was written by the Apostles and those who worked closely with them. They were written under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. They were recognized as inspired right away and were even cited and referred to as Scripture within the NT Scripture. Over the early centuries there were a few debates about certain books, but on a whole the Scriptures were widely accepted by those within the church. Eusebius (ca. 260-340) compiled a list of the 27 books mentioning 5 that were disputed: ccel.org/ccel/schaff/npnf201.iii.viii.xxv.html Later Athanasius (296-373) writes a complete list:newadvent.org/fathers/2806039.htm

I think it is clear from all of the Scripture references in the writings in the early centuries summarized in charts such as this (ntcanon.org/table.shtml) that Scripture was recognized as Scripture long before there was a council. If the Christians in the centuries before any of the councils could use Scripture and know that it was inspired by the Holy Spirit, then why must someone today who believes the same thing about these writings have to accept the authority of the council? I don’t agree with that claim that the author of your link is making. **If my church would have a council and decree that the book of Matthew is canonical, and you think it is canonical, does that mean that you have to believe everything that my church believes as well?
**
This is a good summary I found recently about the development of the NT Canon: faculty.gordon.edu/hu/bi/ted_hildebrandt/ntesources/ntarticles/gtj-nt/kent-hownt-gtj-67.pdf

Only if you believe that Jesus founded a Church on Peter and the other Apostles, and that Church is the “pillar and foundation of truth”(1 Tim. 3:15) and should “all agree with one another with no divisions and be of one mind and conviction” (1 Cor. 1:10). So, I would say a wholehearted “yes” to that question, I don’t understand why one would answer otherwise.