Determination of the canon of the NT

[Protestant101]

Joe, I know it would be good for your purposes here to have people think Roman Catholics were the “first church” but it simply isn’t true. As we both agreed, there was no “Catholic” or “Protestant” in the early NT days…none of the current denominations that we know today existed back then; but without exception, we all have ancestors. These ancestors can be traced back to as far back as our respective beliefs go in history; for this is the principle way to identify when a given denomination came into being, Roman Catholics cannot date most of their beliefs any earlier than the NT; whereas Adventist beliefs have existed since Eden. Atleast this is my current understanding.

I think it’s also very clear, if you look into this, that the Jews and Samaritans established much of the “canon” as did the various OT & NT prophets; but we need to keep in mind the very harmonious nature of both OT and NT; because this shows that books such as those within the “Apocrypha,” or as some choose to call it, the “Deuterocanonical Books;” are not in harmony with the books which are now deemed as “canon” by Protestants. So we can say that the Bible speaks for itself. Any “canon” that is not in harmony with the current cannon, cannot be Scripture. It is not God’s Word.

I think that you would also know the date/s that the Deutorcanonical Books were added to, or determined to be “canon;” and this is the one, major decision by Roman Catholics that your Church would really like to see Protestants adopt and agree to. But these dates also prove that Catholics did add the Apocrypha to the other books then existing as cannon. At any rate; it is easy to see how others, besides Catholics, established the Biblical Canon well before a Catholic even existed.

Of course; I would not want to ever forget the many and major ways that Roman Catholics have embraced, taught, and practiced God’s Word in the world. You are an amazing bunch and have been a real blessing to so many! Your love for God’s Holy Word does show!

 

[joe370]

=

Protestant101;7463929]Joe, I know it would be good for your purposes here to have people think Roman Catholics were the “first church” but it simply isn’t true. As we both agreed, there was no “Catholic” or “Protestant” in the early NT days…none of the current denominations that we know today existed back then; but without exception, we all have ancestors.

Taking my words out of context is not cool brother. I said there were no catholic or protestant denominations. Emphasis on denominations. There was only one church established on Pentecost, that traversed the centuries, leading up to the great east west schism, and you don’t believe the CC is that one church and do. I know it would be good for your purposes to believe that the CC was a man made church, so please, give me the name of the man or men that founded the CC in union with the bishop of Rome, and when?

These ancestors can be traced back to as far back as our respective beliefs go in history; for this is the principle way to identify when a given denomination came into being, Roman Catholics cannot date most of their beliefs any earlier than the NT; whereas Adventist beliefs have existed since Eden. Atleast this is my current understanding.

Proof please???

I think it’s also very clear, if you look into this, that the Jews and Samaritans established much of the “canon”

All of the apostles were Jews, so yes, that is correct. The codification of the canon of scripture is another thing.

as did the various OT & NT prophets; but we need to keep in mind the very harmonious nature of both OT and NT; because this shows that books such as those within the “Apocrypha,” or as some choose to call it, the “Deuterocanonical Books;” are not in harmony with the books which are now deemed as “canon” by Protestants. So we can say that the Bible speaks for itself. Any “canon” that is not in harmony with the current cannon, cannot be Scripture. It is not God’s Word.

Nothing will change your mind regarding the Deuterocanonicals so I digress…

 

[Dokimas]

So, in your opinion, was it a fallible decision or an infallible decision, via the guidance of the Holy Spirit, regarding the determination of the canon of the NT?

Everything the Holy Spirit does is infallible. IMO, the NT is the product of His work as He graciously used fallible people.

I feel, as was mentioned in another thread, many questions here are intended to bait. I know because I ask baiting questions myself some times. The above is my response to you was a careful as I could be trying to answer your question correctly while not being misunderstood thus backed into a wrong corner, a corner that doesn’t exist but in minds those are willing to misunderstand.

 

[Dokimas]

Joe, I know it would be good for your purposes here to have people think Roman Catholics were the “first church” but it simply isn’t true. As we both agreed, there was no “Catholic” or “Protestant” in the early NT days…none of the current denominations that we know today existed back then; but without exception, we all have ancestors. These ancestors can be traced back to as far back as our respective beliefs go in history; for this is the principle way to identify when a given denomination came into being, Roman Catholics cannot date most of their beliefs any earlier than the NT; whereas Adventist beliefs have existed since Eden. Atleast this is my current understanding.

I think it’s also very clear, if you look into this, that the Jews and Samaritans established much of the “canon” as did the various OT & NT prophets; but we need to keep in mind the very harmonious nature of both OT and NT; because this shows that books such as those within the “Apocrypha,” or as some choose to call it, the “Deuterocanonical Books;” are not in harmony with the books which are now deemed as “canon” by Protestants. So we can say that the Bible speaks for itself. Any “canon” that is not in harmony with the current cannon, cannot be Scripture. It is not God’s Word.

I think that you would also know the date/s that the Deutorcanonical Books were added to, or determined to be “canon;” and this is the one, major decision by Roman Catholics that your Church would really like to see Protestants adopt and agree to. But these dates also prove that Catholics did add the Apocrypha to the other books then existing as cannon. At any rate; it is easy to see how others, besides Catholics, established the Biblical Canon well before a Catholic even existed.

Of course; I would not want to ever forget the many and major ways that Roman Catholics have embraced, taught, and practiced God’s Word in the world. You are an amazing bunch and have been a real blessing to so many! Your love for God’s Holy Word does show!

Good post. Thank you.

 

[JustaServant]

The Catholic Church Determined the Canon of Scripture

“For the blessed apostle Paul himself, following the rule of his predecessor John, writes only by name to seven Churches in the following order–to the Corinthians afirst…there is a second to the Corinthians and to the Thessalonians, yet one Church is recognized as being spread over the entire world…Howbeit to Philemon one, to Titus one, and to Timothy two were put in writing…to be in honour however with the Catholic Church for the ordering of ecclesiastical discipline…one to the Laodicenes, another to the Alexandrians, both forged in Paul’s name to suit the heresy of Marcion, and several others, which cannot be received into the Catholic Church; for it is not fitting that gall be mixed with honey. The Epistle of Jude no doubt, and the couple bearing the name of John, are accepted by the Catholic Church…But of Arsinous, called also Valentinus, or of Militiades we receive nothing at all.” The fragment of Muratori (A.D. 177).

“The same authority of the apostolic churches will afford evidence to the other Gospels also, which we possess equally through their means, and according to their usage–I mean the Gospels of John and Matthew–whilst that which Mark published may be affirmed to be Peter’s whose interpreter Mark was. For even Luke’s form of the Gospel men usually ascribe to Paul.” Tertullian, Against Marcion, 4:5 (A.D. 212).

“In his [Origen] first book on Matthew’s Gospel, maintaining the Canon of the Church, he testifies that he knows only four Gospels, writing as follows: Among the four Gospels, which are the only indisputable ones in the Church of God under heaven, I have learned by tradition that the first was written by Matthew, who was once a publican, but afterwards an apostle of Jesus Christ, and it was prepared for the converts from Judaism, and published in the Hebrew language. The second is by Mark, who composed it according to the instructions of Peter, who in his Catholic epistle acknowledges him as a son, saying, ‘The church that is at Babylon elected together with you, saluteth you, and so doth Marcus, my son.’ And the third by Luke, the Gospel commended by Paul, and composed for Gentile converts. Last of all that by John.” Origen, Commentary on Matthew, fragment in Eusebius Church History, 6:25,3 (A.D. 244).

“Learn also diligently, and from the Church, what are the books of the Old Testaments, and what those of the New.” Cyril of Jerusalem, Catechetical Lectures, 4:33 (A.D. 350).

“Likewise it has been said: Now indeed we must treat of the divine Scriptures, what the universal Catholic Church accepts and what she ought to shun. The order of the Old Testament begins here: Genesis one book, Exodus one book, Leviticus one book, Numbers one book, Deuteronomy one book, Josue Nave one book, Judges one book, Ruth one book, Kings four books, Paralipomenon two books, Psalms one book, Solomon three books, Proverbs one book, Ecclesiastes one book, Canticle of Canticles one book, likewise Wisdom one book, Ecclesiasticus one book. Likewise the order of the Prophets. Isaias one book, Jeremias one book,with Ginoth, that is, with his lamentations, Ezechiel one book,Daniel one book, Osee one book, Micheas one book, Joel one book, Abdias one book, Jonas one book, Nahum one book, Habacuc one book, Sophonias one book, Aggeus one book, Zacharias one book, Malachias one book. Likewise the order of the histories. Job one book, Tobias one book, Esdras two books, Esther one book, Judith one book, Machabees two books. Likewise the order of the writings of the New and eternal Testament, which only the holy and Catholic Church supports. Of the Gospels, according to Matthew one book, according to Mark one book, according to Luke one book, according to John one book. The Epistles of Paul [the apostle] in number fourteen. To the Romans one, to the Corinthians two, to the Ephesians one, to the Thessalonians two, to the Galatians one, to the Philippians one, to the Colossians one, to Timothy two, to Titus one, to Philemon one, to the Hebrews one. Likewise the Apocalypse of John, one book. And the Acts of the Apostles one book. Likewise the canonical epistles in number seven. Of Peter the Apostle two epistles, of James the Apostle one epistle, of John the Apostle one epistle, of another John, the presbyter, two epistles, of Jude the Zealut, the Apostle one epistle.” Pope Damasus (regn. A.D. 366-384), Decree of the Council of Rome, The Canon of Scripture (A.D. 382).

“Besides the canonical Scriptures, nothing shall be read, in the church under the title of divine writings.’. The canonical books are:—Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges, Ruth, the four books of Kings, the two books of Paraleipomena (Chronicles), Job, the Psalms of David, the five books of Solomon, the twelve books of the (Minor) Prophets, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Daniel, Ezekiel, Tobias, Judith, Esther, two books of Esdras, two books of the Maccabees. The books of the New Testament are:—the four Gospels, the Acts of the Apostles, thirteen Epistles of S. Paul, one Epistle of S. Paul to the Hebrews, two Epistles of S. Peter, three Epistles of S. John, the Epistle of S. James, the Epistle of S. Jude, the Revelation of S. John. Concerning the confirmation of this canon, the transmarine Church shall be consulted.” Council of Hippo, Canon 36 (A.D. 393).

 

[JustaServant]

“I beseech you to bear patiently, if I also write, by way of remembrance, of matters with which you are acquainted, influenced by the need and advantage of the Church. In proceeding to make mention of these things [the canon], I shall adopt, to comment my undertaking, the pattern of Luke…to reduce into order for themselves the books termed apocryphal, and to mix them up with the divinely inspired Scripture, concerning which we have been fully persuaded, as they who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and ministers of the Word, delivered to the fathers; it seemed good to me also, having been urged thereto by true brethren, and having learned from the beginning, to set before you the books included in the Canon…” Athanasius, Festal Letters, 39 (A.D. 397).

“[It has been decided] that nothing except the Canonical Scriptures should be read in the church under the name of the Divine Scriptures. But the Canonical Scriptures are: Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, Josue, Judges, Ruth, four books of Kings, Paralipomenon two books, Job, the Psalter of David, five books of Solomon, twelve books of the Prophets, Isaias, Jeremias, Daniel, Ezechiel, Tobias, Judith, Esther, two books of Esdras, two books of the Maccabees. Moreover, of the New Testament: Four books of the Gospels, the Acts of the Apostles one book, thirteen epistles of Paul the Apostle, one of the same to the Hebrews, two of Peter, three of John, one of James, one of Jude, the Apocalypse of John.” Council of Carthage III, Canon 47 (A.D. 397).

“The authority of our books [Scriptures], which is confirmed by agreement of so many nations, supported by a succession of apostles, bishops, and councils, is against you.” Augustine, Reply to Faustus the Manichean, 13:5 (c. A.D. 400).

“If any one shall say, or shall believe, that other Scriptures, besides those which the Catholic Church has received, are to be esteemed of authority, or to be venerated, let him be anathema.” Council of Toledo, Canon 12 (A.D. 400).

“A brief addition shows what books really are received in the canon. These are the desiderata of which you wished to be informed verbally: of Moses five books, that is, of Genesis, of Exodus, of Leviticus, of Numbers, of Deuteronomy, and Josue, of Judges one book, of Kings four books, also Ruth, of the Prophets sixteen books, of Solomon five books, the Psalms. Likewise of the histories, Job one book, of Tobias one book, Esther one, Judith one, of the Machabees two, of Esdras two, Paralipomenon two books. Likewise of the New Testament: of the Gospels four books, of Paul the Apostle fourteen epistles, of John three, epistles of Peter two, an epistle of Jude, an epistle of James, the Acts of the Apostles, the Apocalypse of John.” Pope Innocent (regn. A.D. 401-417), Epistle to Exsuperius Bishop of Toulose, 6:7,13 (A.D. 405).

“Item, that besides the Canonical Scriptures nothing be read in the church under the name of divine Scripture. But the Canonical Scriptures are as follows: Genesis…The Revelation of John…for these are the things which we have received from our fathers to be read in the church.” Council of Carthage, African Code, Canon 24 (A.D. 419).

"Now the whole canon of Scripture on which we say this judgment is to be exercised, is contained in the following books:–Five books of Moses, that is, Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy; one book of Joshua the son of Nun; one of Judges; one short book called Ruth, which seems rather to belong to the beginning of Kings; next, four books of Kings, and two of Chronicles --these last not following one another, but running parallel, so to speak, and going over the same ground. The books now mentioned are history, which contains a connected narrative of the times, and follows the order of the events. There are other books which seem to follow no regular order, and are connected neither with the order of the preceding books nor with one another, such as Job, and Tobias, and Esther, and Judith, and the two books of Maccabees, and the two of Ezra, which last look more like a sequel to the continuous regular history which terminates with the books of Kings and Chronicles. Next are the Prophets, in which there is one book of the Psalms of David; and three books of Solomon, viz., Proverbs, Song of Songs, and Ecclesiastes. For two books, one called Wisdom and the other Ecclesiasticus, are ascribed to Solomon from a certain resemblance of style, but the most likely opinion is that they were written by Jesus the son of Sirach. Still they are to be reckoned among the prophetical books, since they have attained recognition as being authoritative.

The remainder are the books which are strictly called the Prophets: twelve separate books of the prophets which are connected with one another, and having never been disjoined, are reckoned as one book; the names of these prophets are as follows:–Hosea, Joel, Amos, Obadiah, Jonah, Micah, Nahum, Habakkuk Zephaniah, Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi; then there are the four greater prophets, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Daniel, Ezekiel. The authority of the Old Testament is contained within the limits of these forty-four books. That of the New Testament, again, is contained within the following:–Four books of the Gospel, according to Matthew, according to Mark, according to Luke, according to John; fourteen epistles of the Apostle Paul–one to the Romans, two to the Corinthians, one to the Galatians, to the Ephesians, to the Philippians, two to the Thessalonians, one to the Colossians, two to Timothy, one to Titus, to Philemon, to the Hebrews: two of Peter; three of John; one of Jude; and one of James; one book of the Acts of the Apostles; and one of the Revelation of John." Augustine, On Christian Doctrine, 2:8,12 (A.D. 426).

 

[Protestant101]

=

Taking my words out of context is not cool brother. I said there were no catholic or protestant denominations. Emphasis on denominations. There was only one church established on Pentecost, that traversed the centuries, leading up to the great east west schism, and you don’t believe the CC is that one church and do. I know it would be good for your purposes to believe that the CC was a man made church, so please, give me the name of the man or men that founded the CC in union with the bishop of Rome, and when?

Well; it’s also “not cool” to say I did something, when I didn’t. I am just like you brother, saying how I understood what’s being posted. There was no kniving on my part to deliberately take anything out of context.

You are not accepting that the Roman Catholic Church is a denomination; and I think this is where the difference arises. I still have not seen any proof that there was only one church in existence during the early NT years; so if you would prove that, I would appreciate it. As we already discussed, there was no “Roman Catholic” and no “Protestant” mentioned in the Bible at all, so further information is needed to clarify your point. I have clarified my thinking on “the church” in some posts above.

 

[joe370]

Well; it’s also “not cool” to say I did something, when I didn’t. I am just like you brother, saying how I understood what’s being posted. There was no kniving on my part to deliberately take anything out of context.

You are not accepting that the Roman Catholic Church is a denomination; and I think this is where the difference arises. I still have not seen any proof that there was only one church in existence during the early NT years; so if you would prove that, I would appreciate it. As we already discussed, there was no “Roman Catholic” and no “Protestant” mentioned in the Bible at all, so further information is needed to clarify your point. I have clarified my thinking on “the church” in some posts above.

I didn’t think that you did it intentionally… No, Jesus did not provide a name for His church. However, we do see bishops in Jesus’ church, as early as the beginning of the 2nd century, referring to Jesus’ church as the Catholic Church, with good reason. I have no problem stating that the CC in union with bishop of Rome, is a denomination among all the other denominations, in the world today. However, as we go back in time, each protestant church ceases to exist. Prior to the reformation, all protestant churches cease to exist.

Prior to the reformation we see how many denominations?

In the 4th century we see how many denominations?

In the 1st century we see how many denominations?

You asked me to provide proof that there was only one church in existence during the early NT years. We do see some present day oriental and eastern orthodox churches that can trace their lineage all the way back to the apostles; are those the churches to which you are referring? But what we don’t see are any Protestant or non-Catholic churches until the 16th century; correct me if I am wrong?

 

[joe370]

Protestant 101, is it your opinion that the following bishops all belonged to the same Church, which they referred to as the Catholic Church, but that this Catholic Church, to which they belonged, is not the the Catholic Church to which I belong?

Ignatius of Antioch (Turkey) - was the third Bishop of Antioch, and was a student of John the Apostle:

Let that be deemed a proper Eucharist, which is [administered] either by the bishop, or by one to whom he has entrusted it. Wherever the bishop shall appear, there let the multitude also be; by the bishop, or by one to whom he has entrusted it.** Wherever the bishop shall appear, there let the multitude also be; even as, wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church."** Ignatius of Antioch, Epistle to the Smyrneans, 8:2 (c. A.D. 110).

Irenaeus (2nd century AD – 202) - was Bishop of Lugdunum in Gaul, then a part of the Roman Empire (now Lyons, France). He was an early church father and apologist, and his writings were formative in the early development of Christian theology. He was a hearer of Polycarp, who in turn was a disciple of John the Evangelist:

“Nor does it consist in this, that he should again falsely imagine, as being above this [fancied being], a Pleroma at one time supposed to contain thirty, and at another time an innumerable tribe of Aeons, as these teachers who are destitute of truly divine wisdom maintain; while the Catholic Church possesses one and the same faith throughout the whole world, as we have already said.” Irenaeus, Against Heresies, 1:10,3 (A.D. 180).

Tertullian (160 – 220 AD) - was an early Christian author from Carthage in the Roman province of Africa:

“For it is evident that those men lived not so long ago,–in the reign of Antoninus for the most part,–and that they at first were believers in the doctrine of the Catholic Church, in the church of Rome under the episcopate of the blessed Eleutherus, until on account of their ever restless curiosity, with which they even infected the brethren, they were more than once expelled.” Tertullian, On the Prescription Against Heretics, 22,30 (A.D. 200).

Polycarp (69 – 155 AD) - was a 2nd century Christian bishop of Smyrna (Anatolia) - and disciple of John the Apostle. The Island Of Patmos is located in the Aegean Sea just off the west coast of Anatolia, or Asia Minor. It was there that the The Apostle John was given to write the book of Revelation, including the letters to the The Seven Churches - Ephesus, Smyrna, Pergamum, Thyatira, Sardis, Philadelphia, and Laodicea:

“All the people wondered that there should be such a difference between the unbelievers and the elect, of whom this most admirable Polycarp was one, having in our own times been an apostolic and prophetic teacher, and bishop of the Catholic Church which is in Smyrna. For every word that went out of his mouth either has been or shall yet be accomplished.” Martyrdom of Polycarp, 16:2 (A.D. 155).

Cyprian was a bishop of Carthage, an ancient city on the northern shore of Africa (250 AD):

”Whence you ought to know that the bishop is in the Church, and the Church in the bishop; and if any one be not with the bishop, that he is not in the Church, and that those flatter themselves in vain who creep in, not having peace with God’s priests, and think that they communicate secretly with some; while the Church, which is Catholic and one, is not cut nor divided, but is indeed connected and bound together by the cement of priests who cohere with one another.” Cyprian, To Florentius, Epistle 66/67 (A.D. 254).

Cyril of Jerusalem was a theologian of the early Church (313– 386).

“Concerning this Holy Catholic Church Paul writes to Timothy, ‘That thou mayest know haw thou oughtest to behave thyself in the House of God, which is the Church of the Living God, the pillar and ground of the truth’” Cyril of Jerusalem, Catechetical Lectures,18:25(A.D.

Augustine of Hippo, (a city in the northeastern corner of Algeria):

“We must hold to the Christian religion and to communication in her Church, which is Catholic and which is called Catholic not only by her own members but even by all her enemies. For when heretics or the adherents of schisms talk about her, not among themselves but with strangers, willy-nilly they call her nothing else but Catholic. For they will not be understood unless they distinguish her by this name which the whole world employs in her regard.” Augustine, The True Religion, 7:12 (A.D. 390).

The council of Nicea called by Constantine, comprised of 318 bishops from across the Roman Empire, were invited to the Turkish town of Nicea, in an attempt to find common ground on what historians now refer to as the Arian Controversy. It was the first ever worldwide gathering of Jesus’ Church, which was called the Catholic Church at the council of Nicea:

“Concerning those who call themselves Cathari, if they come over to the Catholic and Apostolic Church, the great and holy Synod decrees that they who are ordained shall continue as they are in the clergy. But it is before all things necessary that they should profess in writing that they will observe and follow the dogmas of the Catholic and Apostolic Church; in particular that they will communicate with persons who have been twice married, and with those who having lapsed in persecution have had a period [of penance] laid upon them, and a time [of restoration]** fixed so that in all things they will follow the dogmas of the Catholic Church…” **Council of Nicaea I (A.D. 325). Council of Nicea

 

[Gal219]

Many thanks to Joe and Servant for the effort. I posted earlier, page five and feel ignored for lack of any response countering my thoughts. Perhaps they were just not deep enough for this forum. I truly hope we can all realize that the time we spend pursuing the word of God can be better spent glorifying God in private or community prayer. I feel, as a Catholic that these forums are really not the best way to convince Protestants that God dwells among us at every CC, in nearly every settlement on earth. The Rosary is the best tool for the conversion of those who choose not to “walk with Jesus” for his sayings are hard. The Church is inclusive of all whom are baptized in the Spirit, and all are trusted, by Jesus, to the holder of the keys to the kingdom. So were all (the baptized) truly Universal Christians, that is Catholics whether you like it or not. If God wanted us to argue over the true canon of Holy Scripture he would of given us the bible through his sons ministry, that the Church would be an outgrowth of the book. Rather he gave us the Church built on Peter which determined the canon many of you seem to doubt. This is really easy stuff, my five year old gets it. The canon was spread, preached, lived before it was ever recorded on parchment or hide because God wants you to stay in the flock of the see of Peter. Allow yourselves to be fed by “Peter” as Jesus himself instructed you to do. It cost Jesus his life to give us his Body and Blood. Each day stray from the CC, you miss out on the sacrifice of God’s Son, intended for you! Lose Your Life doubters, and you will find it in Christ Jesus. I love you all!!!

 

[simspt]

Many thanks to Joe and Servant for the effort. I posted earlier, page five and feel ignored for lack of any response countering my thoughts. Perhaps they were just not deep enough for this forum. I truly hope we can all realize that the time we spend pursuing the word of God can be better spent glorifying God in private or community prayer. I feel, as a Catholic that these forums are really not the best way to convince Protestants that God dwells among us at every CC, in nearly every settlement on earth. The Rosary is the best tool for the conversion of those who choose not to “walk with Jesus” for his sayings are hard. The Church is inclusive of all whom are baptized in the Spirit, and all are trusted, by Jesus, to the holder of the keys to the kingdom. So were all (the baptized) truly Universal Christians, that is Catholics whether you like it or not. If God wanted us to argue over the true canon of Holy Scripture he would of given us the bible through his sons ministry, that the Church would be an outgrowth of the book. Rather he gave us the Church built on Peter which determined the canon many of you seem to doubt. This is really easy stuff, my five year old gets it. The canon was spread, preached, lived before it was ever recorded on parchment or hide because God wants you to stay in the flock of the see of Peter. Allow yourselves to be fed by “Peter” as Jesus himself instructed you to do. It cost Jesus his life to give us his Body and Blood. Each day stray from the CC, you miss out on the sacrifice of God’s Son, intended for you! Lose Your Life doubters, and you will find it in Christ Jesus. I love you all!!!

I agree but don’t forget that for centuries the Protestants have led millions of Christians to grace and salvation through the preaching of the Word of God and pastoral ministry.

 

[ChadS]

I agree but don’t forget that for centuries the Protestants have led millions of Christians to grace and salvation through the preaching of the Word of God and pastoral ministry.

The Church will admit that with no problem, but at the same time it rightly points out that our separated brethern do not have the fullness of faith. All Protestant groups are lacking the full seven sacraments, many of them lack a sacramental theology, the idea of a sacrifical priesthood is missing or it’s not adquately explained, a full explanation of the real presence in the Eucharist is missing and even worse mocked in some of these churches.

As for the Protestants leading people to salvation for centuries, that’s nothing compared to the fact that the Church established by Jesus Christ is in it’s third millenia of leading people to salvation.

ChadS

 

[simspt]

The Church will admit that with no problem, but at the same time it rightly points out that our separated brethern do not have the fullness of faith. All Protestant groups are lacking the full seven sacraments, many of them lack a sacramental theology, the idea of a sacrifical priesthood is missing or it’s not adquately explained, a full explanation of the real presence in the Eucharist is missing and even worse mocked in some of these churches.

As for the Protestants leading people to salvation for centuries, that’s nothing compared to the fact that the Church established by Jesus Christ is in it’s third millenia of leading people to salvation.

ChadS

Everything you touched on in one way or another partly influenced my decision to join the CC.

 

[tqualey]

Hi, Gal219,

First, let me welcome you to CAF! I think you will find this a source of enrichment and genuine wisdom. I just joined this thread and will have to go back and look for your posts - but, I do not think you have to worry about the depth of one’s thoughts to get a response - some folks like my old buddy P101 just seems to generate responses at the drop of a post!

I would certainly agree that the Rosary is certainly a most powerful instrument to use for the conversion of sinners and the unity of those who would follow Christ to actually follow Him throughthe means He left: the Church founded on Peter (Matt 16:18) and carried on by the Early Church (and that would be Catholic Church) Fathers.

I am not sure if actually converting Protestants is the sole focus of CAF…maybe someone else would like to address that issue. But, do not think that just those who post are the only one who read the materials presented here. There are many who just want to read and learn what is being said without actually participating.

That is why when someone like my old buddy P101 comes up with one of his ideas on how the history of the early Catholic Cchurch really does not matter -( how can it the way he dismisses it?) it is best to actually address the matter head on. This may do little or nothing for P101 … but, it is probably very helpful for those who just read and reflect on what is being said. And, I think that is the take home message. CAF through its many posters takes ideas and develops them based on the significant body of from the Catholic Church. Many have returned to CAF after having converted to the Church of Christ (the Catholic Church) and announced their new found Faith and the role that CAF played in helping them.

Keep on posting and do not lose heart. You just never know who is reading what you write. Isin’t that right, old buddy P101?

God bless

Many thanks to Joe and Servant for the effort. I posted earlier, page five and feel ignored for lack of any response countering my thoughts. Perhaps they were just not deep enough for this forum. I truly hope we can all realize that the time we spend pursuing the word of God can be better spent glorifying God in private or community prayer. I feel, as a Catholic that these forums are really not the best way to convince Protestants that God dwells among us at every CC, in nearly every settlement on earth. The Rosary is the best tool for the conversion of those who choose not to “walk with Jesus” for his sayings are hard. The Church is inclusive of all whom are baptized in the Spirit, and all are trusted, by Jesus, to the holder of the keys to the kingdom. So were all (the baptized) truly Universal Christians, that is Catholics whether you like it or not. If God wanted us to argue over the true canon of Holy Scripture he would of given us the bible through his sons ministry, that the Church would be an outgrowth of the book. Rather he gave us the Church built on Peter which determined the canon many of you seem to doubt. This is really easy stuff, my five year old gets it. The canon was spread, preached, lived before it was ever recorded on parchment or hide because God wants you to stay in the flock of the see of Peter. Allow yourselves to be fed by “Peter” as Jesus himself instructed you to do. It cost Jesus his life to give us his Body and Blood. Each day stray from the CC, you miss out on the sacrifice of God’s Son, intended for you! Lose Your Life doubters, and you will find it in Christ Jesus. I love you all!!!

 

[Protestant101]

Protestant 101, is it your opinion that the following bishops all belonged to the same Church, which they referred to as the Catholic Church, but that this Catholic Church, to which they belonged, is not the the Catholic Church to which I belong?

No my friend; that is not quite my opinion.

 

[Protestant101]

Keep on posting and do not lose heart. You just never know who is reading what you write. Isin’t that right, old buddy P101?

God bless

Yes; that’s right! You just never know! I have never really gotten into details and evidence re church history, for a reason though. Most of my posts on this subject have just been throwing out the ideas, without really getting into the evidence stage so much. And this is for a reason. I am working on a study to try illustrating my ideas from the Bible. That is going to take eons. And more importantly, I am just exploring Roman Catholic ideas about the subject. It is not just the content of your information I am looking at; it is the manner in which same is offered. The spirit of the message counts for more than the message; at times. I do believe that it is possible for people to see in our exchanges, Christian respect, and support of one another; despite our sometimes sharp disagreements! Time will reveal God’s will in this and other matters we have/will have under consideration here at CAF!

 

[joe370]

No my friend; that is not quite my opinion.

P101, could you elaborate a bit more regarding post 108?

 

[BYUChemAlum]

But what we don’t see are any Protestant or non-Catholic churches until the 16th century; correct me if I am wrong?

This is of course incorrect. There were many non-Catholic churches prior to the 16th century, the largest being the Eastern Orthodox and the Oriental Orthodox churches.

 

[joe370]

This is of course incorrect. There were many non-Catholic churches prior to the 16th century, the largest being the Eastern Orthodox and the Oriental Orthodox churches.

Yes, that is incorrect; I misspoke. How many protestant churches existed prior to the 16th reformation?

 

[SyCarl]

I have not read this entire thread, but even if it were to be admitted that the Catholic Church determined the canon of the New Testament this does not mean that all decisions of the Catholic Church are correct. It does not follow that if you get one thing right that you get all things right.

If I get 100% in a mathematics exam, that does not mean that I can never make a mathematical mistake.