How do Protestatnts defend the canon of the NT

[Dokimas]

But of course she does. We’ve never contested that. As a matter of fact, it wasn’t till I was older that I realized what the line “I believe in one Holy, Catholic Apostolic, Church, the communion of saint…”

When I was young, I thought that the Church and the communion of saints were two different things, until i realized that the second part “communion of saints” was actually defining the first part " the Church".

That was a mind blowing shift for me as I realized that the saints are truly my brothers and sisters.

But I know you are referring to the other denominations. The Church teaches that those who were baptized in the Trinitarian manner are all indeed members of the Catholic Church although separated members.

Thank you for your ideas.

 

[larkin31]

Prudence then humility to accept that which is True.​

Jesus knows who He is and is not intimidated by our honest questions. He seems to totally welcome them. He and He alone has ALL the correct answers. By His mercy and grace through the Holy Spirit in our lives we understand some of them.

I respect your faith in this matter. It is only a statement of faith, but as such–and not pretending to be more–I fully respect it.

 

[larkin31]

Here’s how he will get out of that one.

Scripture as ,you, know it, contain errors that is why he cannot believe our scripture.

But when he cites “scripture” when he says he knows what the apostles and Jewish authorities did to Jesus, he means the crystal ball on his desk called interestingly enough - scripture.

yeah, that’s just what I would say…

 

[monina]

Now, larkin, we’re just having some fun here, 'kay?

Funny and true at the same time, though. And peculiar. One can cite the Scriptures when it’s convenient, but then say, “The writers may be mistaken, interpolating, exaggerating, or lying” when the Scriptures say something inconvenient.

So when he says something about the apostles or Jesus or the Pharisees how does he know that the writer wasn’t mistaken, interpolating, exaggerating or lying?

 

[Dokimas]

So when he says something about the apostles or Jesus or the Pharisees how does he know that the writer wasn’t mistaken, interpolating, exaggerating or lying?

Sacred Tradition and the teachings after the Bible; the leadership of the CC (the CC) is the only answer I can see from the exchanges I’ve had with my catholic brothers and sisters. Of course, I agree with the point I think you are driving at and disagree with the idea of the inerrancy of ST and the CC.

 

[rinnie]

I have no problem believing the Holy Spirit has or does inspire the CC. I don’t believe He inspires the CC as His one and only true church.

Why Not? It says in Scripture that the CHurch must be One, Holy Catholic and Apostolic. Do you deny scripture?

Colossians 3:15 The peace into which you were called into one body.

The CC is the body of Christ. IT is the Church that was started by the Apostles. We have proof here through Apostolic Succession.

Jesus and his Church are one. Who was Saul persecuting? THe CC. Jesus said Saul why are you persecuting ME. THe CC. In 1 Cor. 12:13 We are baptised into ONE BODY.
Scripture says in l cor 12:13 I urge you that there by no divisions among you.

The Holy Spirit is Jesus Christ, how could you say that he would deny the CC as his one true Church?

DId Peter not become he leader of Christ, does the Pope not continue the Church started by Peter? Do you deny this?

 

[monina]

Sacred Tradition and the teachings after the Bible; the leadership of the CC (the CC) is the only answer I can see from the exchanges I’ve had with my catholic brothers and sisters. Of course, I agree with the point I think you are driving at and disagree with the idea of the inerrancy of ST and the CC.

I’m confused by what you’re saying.

My remark was about larkin, an agnostic who believes that Scripture has error, yet who keeps talking about Jesus and the apostles and the Pharisees–info he only knows from Scripture. How does he know anything that was written was not a mistake, exaggeration, interpolation or lie? (That’s using his own quote!)

 

[rinnie]

Sacred Tradition and the teachings after the Bible; the leadership of the CC (the CC) is the only answer I can see from the exchanges I’ve had with my catholic brothers and sisters. Of course, I agree with the point I think you are driving at and disagree with the idea of the inerrancy of ST and the CC.

How can you deny that ST when being taught by the CC is not the true word of God when God promises the CHurch to be with them until the end of time and lead them into all truth through the Holy Spirit?

And if the CC is not the true Church why is it the only Church that has ST?

 

[larkin31]

So when he says something about the apostles or Jesus or the Pharisees how does he know that the writer wasn’t mistaken, interpolating, exaggerating or lying?

I am not 100% sure.

Just like I am not 100% sure that you exist, but I can still proceed with a response to the words appearing (he/she/it) on the screen.

You guys are making yourselves look absurd. Just because I know that the Bible was wrong about Noah’s Flood does not mean that it was wrong about the existence of Pilot.

 

[monina]

I am not 100% sure.

Exactly. No logic at all in your paradigm.

You guys are making yourselves look absurd. Just because I know that the Bible was wrong about Noah’s Flood does not mean that it was wrong about the existence of Pilot.

Well, Pilot’s existence can be proved by historical records.

That Jesus turned over the tables in the Temple cannot. That Jesus taught the Beatitudes cannot.

[sign1]All the things that you’ve posted about Jesus and the apostles and the pharisees you only know because the Scriptures tell you. [/sign1]

Yet you also claim that the Scriptures lie, exaggerate, are mistaken and interpolate. That’s a very tenuous position to hold and, quite frankly, quite indefensible.

 

[rinnie]

Larkin got to call you on something else also!! Sorry but I gotta do it. First let me Say I like you and want you to ask and stick around. But when you leave know the truth about our Church and what it does and does not teach.

Now time to call you out!! Here it is. We don’t need scriptures Larkin. We are Catholic all we need us the Church.

Jesus promised us the Church not the scipture. Jesus never said read and follow scripture to gain eternal life.

Jesus said stay true to the teachings of the Church and the Church leaders. Jesus never gave the bible the power of the Holy Spirit to TEACH. He gave that to the Church. The CHurch is what we are led by, Jesus himself by the power of the Holy Spirit through the mouths of his chosen teachers. Jesus picked them, and they said yes.

Remember what Peter said it was decided that it would be through my mouth. You can read scripture until the cows come home, and never really know what it means until it is explained to you.

Kinda like this buddy. Its raining cats and dogs!! Is it really raining cats and dogs. Of course not you know what that means. You know cats and dogs means its raining hard. But what if you did not know what that meant! Thats TRADITION BUDDY!! You have to be taught what every single words means, and how its intended.

As my Son used to say one day I bought him a shirt he said that is sick How can a shirt be sick, or did he mean I was a sick person for buying it.

Nope he meant that he LOVED the shirt.

 

[larkin31]

Exactly. No logic at all in your paradigm.

I am not claiming anything by logic. YOU FOLKS ARE. You guys are amazing at your ability to claim to be logical, and then when challenged to produce the logic, your response is, “You’re not logical!”

Well, Pilot’s existence can be proved by historical records.

That Jesus turned over the tables in the Temple cannot. That Jesus taught the Beatitudes cannot.

Indeed.

Yet you also claim that the Scriptures lie, exaggerate, are mistaken and interpolate. That’s a very tenuous position to hold and, quite frankly, quite indefensible.

I respond the same way when reading some historical accounts.

You are not up to date on Biblical scholarship in this regard, are you? But, I understand if you do not read it (or read about it). It challenges the idea of inerrancy and absolutism.

 

[Dokimas]

Why Not? It says in Scripture that the CHurch must be One, Holy Catholic and Apostolic. Do you deny scripture?

Colossians 3:15 The peace into which you were called into one body.

The CC is the body of Christ. IT is the Church that was started by the Apostles. We have proof here through Apostolic Succession.

Jesus and his Church are one. Who was Saul persecuting? THe CC. Jesus said Saul why are you persecuting ME. THe CC. In 1 Cor. 12:13 We are baptised into ONE BODY.
Scripture says in l cor 12:13 I urge you that there by no divisions among you.

The Holy Spirit is Jesus Christ, how could you say that he would deny the CC as his one true Church?

DId Peter not become he leader of Christ, does the Pope not continue the Church started by Peter? Do you deny this?

The Scriptures I hope I don’t deny; it’s understanding that don’t seem to go with the Bible that I try to avoid.​

Peter was not the one leader of the early church according to what the NT seems to reveal. He was in subjection to others.

 

[monina]

I am not claiming anything by logic.

Wow.

I’ve never heard anyone claim that it’s good to be illogical. :whacky:

Well, then, we’re all on the same page: you acknowledge that your arguments have no logic. That’s what we’ve been saying, too!

 

[Dokimas]

How can you deny that ST when being taught by the CC is not the true word of God when God promises the CHurch to be with them until the end of time and lead them into all truth through the Holy Spirit?

And if the CC is not the true Church why is it the only Church that has ST?

Jesus promise He’d be with His church but He did not promise there error would not creep in. People lead by the Holy Spirit don’t always allow Him to lead correctly.

 

[larkin31]

Wow.

I’ve never heard anyone claim that it’s good to be illogical. :whacky:

Well, then, we’re all on the same page: you acknowledge that your arguments have no logic. That’s what we’ve been saying, too!

Nice way to twist what I said.

Is honesty of spirit a part of what you believe in? If so, you should practice what you preach. .

 

[PRmerger]

If God through His writers, can’t get it correct about a mustard seed, how do we know He can get anything correct if He’s all knowing?

'zactly, Dokimas! Exactly! :extrahappy:

That’s why you need a Church to be the guardian and interpreter of Scripture!

–so that we’re not left saying, “hmmm…did Jesus literally mean that the mustard seed is the smallest seed in his kingdom? I just don’t know since I am a fallible, deficient human creature…”

 

[larkin31]

Jesus promise He’d be with His church but He did not promise there error would not creep in. People lead by the Holy Spirit don’t always allow Him to lead correctly.

Very well put, it seems to me.

 

[Nicea325]

The Scriptures I hope I don’t deny; it’s understanding that don’t seem to go with the Bible that I try to avoid.​

Peter was not the one leader of the early church according to what the NT seems to reveal. He was in subjection to others.

And where does the NT teach Peter was subject to others?

 

[monina]

Nice way to twist what I said.

Is honesty of spirit a part of what you believe in? If so, you should practice what you preach. .

If everything, as you say, is subjective, why are you holding me up to an objective standard of honesty?

What if, by my own subjective standard, I am being honest? As an agnostic, you have no pull whatsoever in saying I should be honest.