How is it that you know that the Gospel of Barnabas (who was an apostle) is not inspired?

  • Thread starter Thread starter adrift
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
The evidence that non-Catholics accept the authority of the Catholic Church in compiling the Bible Canon is shown as the multiple protestant churches out there do not (usually as there are few cases) differ in the number of books found in their bibles. If every protestant church started using criteria to decide which books are inspired or not… we will probably see MANY different versions of the bible…
 
commenter said:
R. C. Sproul, a Calvinist theologian, described the Catholic Church as having claimed to have created the NT canon; he then wrote No, that actually God created the canon, the role of the Church is to receive the canon. (Sorry I don’t have the reference available).
I would say of course God created the canon; and every individual who reads the NT is a recipient of the canon. But what is the role of the Church? The ancient Church - that part of it that was in unity with a visible magisterium - publicly defined what God created. There will be a New Testament. These books are inspired, those books are not. Yes the canon was already in the Mind of God before the magisterium defined it. But it wasn’t in the minds of individual readers until the magisterium defined it. Individual Christians in unity with the magisterium only then began to follow only this particular canon. Individual Christians not in unity with the magisterium followed other canons. The magisterium didn’t simply ratify what Christians were already using; they ratified what some Christians were more or less using, rejected what other Christians were using.
Perhaps a majority of the ancient “Church” (in the sense of individual believers) rejected the magisterium’s canon. We may live to see that happen again. In some places,
Click to expand...
👍
Christians are quietly adding certain “scriptures” that they claim affirm women, and omitting epistles they don’t like. It’s a small minority now, but tomorrow…
Click to expand...
Indeed. I learned recently that there is a Christian denomination that rejects the writings of St. Paul! :eek:
 
PRmerger, we hope they still accept the authority of the Catholic Church in their bibles, or who knows what next? MANY different (pick and choosing books, and perhaps even editing the books?) bibles? I guess is not enough to have differing doctrines…
 
commenter said:
R. C. Sproul, a Calvinist theologian, described the Catholic Church as having claimed to have created the NT canon; he then wrote No, that actually God created the canon, the role of the Church is to receive the canon. (Sorry I don’t have the reference available).
I would say of course God created the canon; and every individual who reads the NT is a recipient of the canon. But what is the role of the Church? The ancient Church - that part of it that was in unity with a visible magisterium - publicly defined what God created. There will be a New Testament. These books are inspired, those books are not. Yes the canon was already in the Mind of God before the magisterium defined it. But it wasn’t in the minds of individual readers until the magisterium defined it. Individual Christians in unity with the magisterium only then began to follow only this particular canon. Individual Christians not in unity with the magisterium followed other canons. The magisterium didn’t simply ratify what Christians were already using; they ratified what some Christians were more or less using, rejected what other Christians were using.
Perhaps a majority of the ancient “Church” (in the sense of individual believers) rejected the magisterium’s canon. We may live to see that happen again. In some places, Christians are quietly adding certain “scriptures” that they claim affirm women, and omitting epistles they don’t like. It’s a small minority now, but tomorrow…
Click to expand...
We have been saying that for a very long time:
I believe in one God,
the Father almighty,
maker of heaven and earth,
of all things visible and invisible.
Click to expand...
😃

Scriptures are visible 🙂 and so is the Church 🙂

The Church received the full deposit of the Faith

Jude 3
3 Beloved, while eagerly preparing to write to you about the salvation we share, I find it necessary to write and appeal to you to contend for the faith that was once for all entrusted to the saints.
Click to expand...
The deposit includes, and is not limited to, the Scriptures.

They did not fall down from the sky. Through the Church they were revealed and given to us.
 
commenter said:
(Sorry I don’t have the reference available).
I would say of course God created the canon; and every individual who reads the NT is a recipient of the canon. But what is the role of the Church? The ancient Church - that part of it that was in unity with a visible magisterium - publicly defined what God created. There will be a New Testament. These books are inspired, those books are not. Yes the canon was already in the Mind of God before the magisterium defined it. But it wasn’t in the minds of individual readers until the magisterium defined it. Individual Christians in unity with the magisterium only then began to follow only this particular canon. Individual Christians not in unity with the magisterium followed other canons. The magisterium didn’t simply ratify what Christians were already using; they ratified what some Christians were more or less using, rejected what other Christians were using.
Perhaps a majority of the ancient “Church” (in the sense of individual believers) rejected the magisterium’s canon. We may live to see that happen again. In some places, Christians are quietly adding certain “scriptures” that they claim affirm women, and omitting epistles they don’t like. It’s a small minority now, but tomorrow…
Click to expand...
Commenter,
R. C. Sproul, a Calvinist theologian, described the Catholic Church as having claimed to have created the NT canon; he then wrote No, that actually God created the canon, the role of the Church is to receive the canon.
Click to expand...
Calvinists probably read this and go yeah, see here, the Catholic Church just received it and on to their next point…

The Protestant dance of logical idiocy is seen here…

The Church received what God created. Ok…

Someone knocked at my door yesterday and gave me some cookies. I had to think a bit…Oh you are the neigbor down the street and you have little daughters…Wow, you baked some cookies and you want to give them to me as a gift for Valentines day…thank you…

I received some cookes. I spoke with my neighbor. I had to recognize my neigbor and recall who my neighbor was and acknowledge the reason for her being at my door.

The Church has what God created and received it. How did the Church get presented with this gift, all bound up? How did the Church know God was presenting it for reception? In order to receive something from someone, in particular God, you have to acknoweldge that it is God and know that it is what God wants you to have…did God speak to the Church? Did God reveal Himself to the Church…?

God created the Canon. Ok.

How did God create the Canon…the Bible I have talks about how in 7 days he created the earth, humanity, animals…not lots of details but a semblance of what happened. So where do I find that God did this, how He did this, the means by which He did this, and understanding of How He did this and the time frame of How He did this…Where do I validate this claim that God created the Canon?

So, God created the Canon. How?

The Church received the Canon. How?
 
CopticChristian said:
Commenter,

Calvinists probably read this and go yeah, see here, the Catholic Church just received it and on to their next point…

The Protestant dance of logical idiocy is seen here…
(end quote)

I’m sorry, but I would never use a term like “logical idiocy”. I realize you aren’t referring to persons, but to an argument, but still we need to be sensitive to people who hold that argument. Many evangelicals are better Christians than I am. No matter how clearly I draw the connection between the canon, and the magisterium functioning then and today, they will not see that connection unless Catholics treat them with love and respect. The slogan from the American revolution “we must all hang together, or we will all hang separately” applies more than ever for Christians in 2013 America.
Click to expand...
 
I don’t want to offend anyone here, but I’m seeing a lot of circular reasoning here: the CC is right because the CC said so. But how do you really know the CC was right and that the Holy Spirit appeared to them when choosing their canon? And I think that would be the best way to answer this thread.
 
commenter said:
CopticChristian;10369422:
Commenter,

Calvinists probably read this and go yeah, see here, the Catholic Church just received it and on to their next point…

The Protestant dance of logical idiocy is seen here…
(end quote)

I’m sorry, but I would never use a term like “logical idiocy”. I realize you aren’t referring to persons, but to an argument, but still we need to be sensitive to people who hold that argument. Many evangelicals are better Christians than I am. No matter how clearly I draw the connection between the canon, and the magisterium functioning then and today, they will not see that connection unless Catholics treat them with love and respect. The slogan from the American revolution “we must all hang together, or we will all hang separately” applies more than ever for Christians in 2013 America.
Click to expand...
Commenter,

I appreciate your concern, it is not directed at a person, rather to a thought process that is adopted. Do you see reference to a person?

These are synonyms…
blockhead, bonehead, cretin, dimwit, dork, dumbbell, dunce, fool, ignoramus, imbecile, jerk, kook, moron, muttonhead, nincompoop, ninny, nitwit, out to lunch, pinhead, simpleton, stupid, tomfool, twit
Click to expand...
The Protestant thought process when it comes to discerning the Canon as stated, God created it and the Church received it is illogical and tantamount to foolish thinking that causes me to believe that the Protestant mind is out to lunch.
Click to expand...
Does that sound better to you?🤷

I am not addressing what you say as those you find more devoted or not. For that matter I can name many Mormons that surpass many Catholics in their daily lives as being good willed or devoted. This has nothing to do with that.
Click to expand...
 
Robin_des_Bois said:
I don’t want to offend anyone here, but I’m seeing a lot of circular reasoning here: the CC is right because the CC said so. But how do you really know the CC was right and that the Holy Spirit appeared to them when choosing their canon? And I think that would be the best way to answer this thread.
Click to expand...
Robin, we covered one of many contradictions. We have a long road ahead of us according to the contradictions you said there are.

2.________________ of many.

The only circular reasoning you might be referring to is actually a straight line of the Church to Jesus Christ, the Apostles, Peter ---- and all of Peter’s successors. It is a straight line, not circular.

It is circular that we are all covered by the Father’s Grace through Faith in God the Son and the Paraclete the Holy Spirit.

:signofcross:
 
Robin_des_Bois said:
I don’t want to offend anyone here, but I’m seeing a lot of circular reasoning here: the CC is right because the CC said so. But how do you really know the CC was right and that the Holy Spirit appeared to them when choosing their canon? And I think that would be the best way to answer this thread.
Click to expand...
It’s no more circular than your religion’s premise: Islam is right because Mohamed said so. And Mohamed is right because Islam said so.

Tu quoque.
 
Isaiah45_9 said:
Robin, we covered one of many contradictions. We have a long road ahead of us according to the contradictions you said there are.

2.________________ of many.

The only circular reasoning you might be referring to is actually a straight line of the Church to Jesus Christ, the Apostles, Peter ---- and all of Peter’s successors. It is a straight line, not circular.

It is circular that we are all covered by the Father’s Grace through Faith in God the Son and the Paraclete the Holy Spirit.

:signofcross:
Click to expand...
I was told to leave contradictions to another thread. But if you insist, I can list some to you.
Now, how do you know the CC was right in choosing the canon? Suppose someone is interested in converting to Christianity, how would you convince him the CC got ut right?
 
Isaiah45_9 said:
Robin, we covered one of many contradictions. We have a long road ahead of us according to the contradictions you said there are.

2.________________ of many.
Click to expand...
Yes. I would like to see what other contradictions you have seen so we can discuss those apparent contradictions, now that we have laid to rest the 2 that you offered earlier.
 
PRmerger said:
It’s no more circular than your religion’s premise: Islam is right because Mohamed said so. And Mohamed is right because Islam said so.

Tu quoque.
Click to expand...
I’m not here to bash Christianity, but the thread is about how to know the CC was right.
If someone were to open a thread about how Muslims know that their religion is right, it wouldn’t be a correct answer for the Muslims to say: “because the Prophet said so”. It wouldn’t be answering the thread.
 
Robin_des_Bois said:
I’m not here to bash Christianity, but the thread is about how to know the CC was right.
Click to expand...
I understand that.

But the answer for why the Catholic Church is right is the same answer that you believe comes from Islam: because you have faith in what its prophet has said.

It’s no more circular than your reasoning. 🤷
 
PRmerger said:
It’s no more circular than your religion’s premise: Islam is right because Mohamed said so. And Mohamed is right because Islam said so.

Tu quoque.
Click to expand...
In fact, so much so, that even critcizing the “prophet”, or questioning the “truth” of the Koran can get you killed.

Jon
 
Robin_des_Bois said:
I don’t want to offend anyone here, but I’m seeing a lot of circular reasoning here: the CC is right because the CC said so. But how do you really know the CC was right and that the Holy Spirit appeared to them when choosing their canon? And I think that would be the best way to answer this thread.
Click to expand...
Robin,

This is the CAF that answers questions and defends the teachings.

How do we know that the Catholic Church was right? Good Question. We have history to show that there was a Church and that Church has teachings that are consistent in time.

You would understand the difficulty when someone says…

How do you prove Mohammed was a prophet?

Which branch of Islam is the true Islam

Sunni?
Shia?
Kharijite?

Who has the truth…those that follow the book, those that follow the descendants of Mohammed or those that agree to disagree?

These questions become similar in many respects and in consideration that Mohammed came long after Christ, the question is how is it that Mohammed has any relevance to what it is we are to know about God that Christainity cannot provide evidence for?
 
The question of “where did the canon come from” seldom came up in my Catholic education or reading until recently, and I suspect the same for Protestants. I think we assumed it was a “given”, could not have been anything else. Actually some visible human agency had to make decisions. Some authority determined there should be a NT. They determined that the OT was still inspired. Many, perhaps most believers, disagreed. The Church determined 27 books are inspired, those other books are not inspired. The universal church (not some “consensus”) told local congregations to drop some of their favorite books as not being scripture. The universal church authority told scholars which books to treat as scripture. Then this human agency declared the canon was “closed”! There were other Christians, some congregations, that continued promoting their own canons. Eventually the canon promoted by one human agency - those united to the Pope - won over the other Christian canons, even though the other canons may have had more believers. The Christians who supported those other canons all referred to “objective criteria” and “consensus of the faithful” as to why their books should be chosen instead of the magisterium’s canon. But the magisterium won. Most people respected the magisterium, so in the long run they accepted only their canon.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top