Some think Matthew 4:4 is teaching sola Scriptura

[Gorgias]

The issue of the inclusion of these books was debated way before the Protestant Reformation.

Jerome, a Bible translator from the 5th century at first refused to translate these books because he thought they were not canonical and when he was pressed to finally translate them he went as far as to write about the doubtfulness of the text in the prologue of each book.

So this question of whether these books are truly inspired by God did not start with the Protestant Reformation, it started with the Catholic church.

Agreed.

And, in answer to your question, the Catholic Church did decide! That is, the Catholic Church decided that the books colloquially known as ‘deuterocanonical’ are in fact part of the canon of Scripture.

That they were debated up until the time of the Church’s declaration is immaterial. (After all, there were debates about Christ’s nature and about the Trinity. Would you point to any of them as proof that Christ isn’t “fully human and fully divine”? Or that the doctrine of the Trinity isn’t authentic?)

 

[medwigel]

the Catholic Church decided that the books colloquially known as ‘deuterocanonical’ are in fact part of the canon of Scripture.

And many non-Catholics still question these books and whether they are truly words inspired vs words written by godly men. Just because the Catholic church has accepted it doesn’t mean that the doubt over the text and the debate about text has gone away.
Even the Jews reject these books as scripture.
These books were written in the 400 years in between Malachi and the birth of Christ which was a period known as the silent years, where both Jewish and New Testament sources agree that there was no devine prophetic utterance at that time. So if there was no devine inspiration when these books were written then they do not hold the same weight as the Old and New Testament.

 

[Agathon]

These books were written in the 400 years in between Malachi and the birth of Christ which was a period known as the silent years, where both Jewish and New Testament sources agree that there was no devine prophetic utterance at that time.

Prophetic utterances aren’t the only criteria for inspiration.

 

[Agathon]

And many non-Catholics still question these books and whether they are truly words inspired vs words written by godly men. Just because the Catholic church has accepted it doesn’t mean that the doubt over the text and the debate about text has gone away.

You mean Protestants. The East has a bigger canon than we do.

 

[jlhargus]

It is man without the sole reliance on scripture that leads to divisions in Christ.

Yes men, privately interpreting scripture apart from the teaching authority Christ sent to teach the whole world to the end, Mt28:16-20. The teaching authority Christ promised to send the Holy Spirit to lead them into all truth. The Church was up and running 15 to 20 years before the first word of the NT was penned, teaching the gospel, converting, reproofing, correcting, instructing in righteousness. That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works.

Except for John most of the apostles were dead before the last NT was completed. It was three hundred years after Christ, before the canon of the NT was set. What authority decided what was and was not an inspired NT or OT writing? What authority decided what was gospel truth or another gospel? False scripture even circulated in the apostle’s time.

Scriptures are without error but interpretations are clearly not as seen with thousands of contradicting interpretations scattering people of faith using scripture alone. The authority of scripture alone certainly didn’t produce a list of books.

The Apostle John didn’t leave a list of books even though the Holy Spirit could have inspired him or any other apostle to do so. Scripture can’t be a sole authority when men had to decide what books where inspired? Tradition cannot contradict scripture. Scripture is vital to knowing God’s will, but scripture must be interpreted by those Christ sent and promised the Holy Spirit to guide them into all truth, not guess work.

 

[jlhargus]

Posted a dupe post

 

[Cathoholic]

medwigel . . .

Just because the Catholic church has accepted it doesn’t mean that the doubt over the text and the debate about text has gone away.

OK. Show me IN THE BIBLE, where the New Testament Canon is listed.

Show me the verse that says . . .

. . . In the New Testament we have Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. Also Acts, Romans . . .etc. etc. Jude and Revelation.

WHERE is THAT verse medwigel?

Are you suggesting the “debate has gone away” concerning the New Testament (because I have seen a couple of Protestants RIGHT HERE on CAF, suggest certain New Testament books are NOT Scripture)?

 

[jlhargus]

I daresay satan has gotten into the heart of many leaders over the years and they then preached false doctrine that was not supported by the Bible, as in what I pointed out before of the Church branding Mary Magdalene as a prostitute and creating a whole “tradition” based on this lie. It is the Church without scripture that misleads people, no the other way around.

Mary Magdalene has nothing to do with infallibility or even a dogma of the Church. Whether she was a prostitute of not was theological speculation and still open to discussion.

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/09761a.htm

 

[jlhargus]

We all rebuked the devil’s efforts to discourage us and take away from the good that we had done. Together we sent up prayers to bind the spirit of oppression that we found ourselves under and loosed deliverance and freedom.

I found your experience edifying but the following is how even Protestant scholars see the fullness of binding and loosing in scripture. To different degrees we all share in Christ gifts. We are all priest but only bishops share in its fullness

The Anchor Bible commentary, A Protestant work says this: “By conferring the power to bind and loose upon church leadership, Jesus authorizes it to interpret the Scriptures and establish norms for Christian behaviour (vol 1).” R.T. France, another Protestant scholar says; “these terms (binding and loosing) thus refer to a teaching function, and more specifically one of making halakhic pronouncements (i.e. relative to laws not written down in Jewish Scriptures but based on an oral interpretation of them) which are binding on the people of God. In that case, Peter’s ‘power of the keys’ declared in (Matt) 16:19 is not so much that of a doorkeeper, who decides who may or may not be admitted, but that of the steward whose keys of office enable him to regulate the affairs of the household.” (Matthew: Evangelist and Teacher, 1989. 247)

** Speaking of “binding and loosing, R.T. France, in another place says; “’Shall be bound & shall be looosed’ (as stated in Matt 16:16-19) are literally future perfects (i.e. shall have been bound, shall have been loosed), and as future perfect sounds as stilted in Greek as in English, the tense is apparently deliberate. In that case, it is not heaven that will ratify Peter’s independent decisions, but that Peter will pass on decisions that have already been made in heaven.” (The Gospel according to Matthew, an introduction and commentary). –

[Lk 22:29 And I appoint unto you a kingdom, as my Father hath appointed unto me; 30 That ye may eat and drink at my table in my kingdom, and sit on thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel. 31 And the Lord said, Simon, Simon, behold, Satan hath desired to have you, that he may sift you as wheat: 32 but I have prayed for thee, that thy faith fail not: and when thou art converted, strengthen thy brethren.

Jesus regenerates the Davidic Kingdom=twelve tribes of Israel, the new spiritual kingdom of Israel, in the world, but not of the world, he appoints the apostles as ministers to oversee spreading of the Kingdom on earth, with Peter as Prime Minister, as delegated holder of the keys, Isa 22:19-22.

 

[jlhargus]

The desired structure of the church can be found in Ephesians 4:11-16 These are gifts given to the church from Christ: apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors and teachers. He didn’t appoint just one position, Jesus gifted us with a 5 fold ministry to keep us on the right path.

Correct he didn’t appoint one position, no one teaches that. All these ministries are found in the Church. Are all apostles, are all prophets, are all evangelists are, pastors and teachers? Christ sent one visible teaching authority, the bishops of the world which includes the pope, to teach the whole world till the end of the world, Mt28:16-20. He promised the Holy Spirit to lead them into all truth. Paul even checked his teaching with that one visible teaching authority.

[Gal2:1 Then fourteen years after I went up again to Jerusalem with Barnabas, and took Titus with me also. 2 And I went up by revelation, and communicated unto them unto them that gospel which I preach among the Gentiles, but privately to them which were of reputation, lest by any means I shouldrun, or had run, in vain.]

What did people do the first time the gospel was preached by Peter?

Acts2:41 Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls. 42 And they continued stedfastly in the apostles doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers.]

 

[jlhargus]

Yes Paul withstood Peter’s bad example, of respect of persons, and it is because of Peter’s leadership and influence in the Church that the others followed his example. Peter taught nothing doctrinally wrong. It was Peter himself who brought the Gentiles into the Church. Peter was not being a good example this has nothing to do with infallibility. Popes have been withstood since, sometimes rightly sometimes not. Paul an apostle did the same or worse, but no one takes note of it,

Paul wanted Timothy to accompany him Acts6:3 and he circumcised him because of the Jews.]

Paul had Timothy circumcised out of respect of persons, the Jews. Paul preached against circumcision. I bet you never took note of Paul’s actions which was no different than what Peter did. Paul’s actions did not strike you as of any importance, why? Why do you find Peter’s actions more important than Paul’s?

[Lk 22:29 And I appoint unto you a kingdom, as my Father hath appointed unto me; 30 That ye may eat and drink at my table in my kingdom, and sit on thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel. 31 And the Lord said, Simon, Simon, behold, Satan hath desired to have you, that he may sift you as wheat: 32 but I have prayed for thee, that thy faith fail not: and when thou art converted, strengthen thy brethren.

Jesus regenerates the Davidic Kingdom=twelve tribes of Israel, the new spiritual kingdom of Israel, in the world, but not of the world, he appoints the apostles as ministers to oversee spreading of the Kingdomon earth, with Peter as Prime Minister, as delegated holder of the keys, Isa 22:19-22.

 

[medwigel]

Are you suggesting the “debate has gone away” concerning the New Testament

No, I’m not saying that. I know there are some who question the Bible entirely or certain portions.
So if there are questions I’m open minded enough to ask what issues they have. I then take what they tell me and apply my Bible knowledge to the issues. I would also consult my Pastor, who studies the Word more in-depth than I do. If there is a flaw in their thinking I can hopefully point it out to them. Even if we don’t agree the process of finding the truth can serve to reinforce and strengthen your faith.

 

[Cathoholic]

medwigel (parenthtical addition mine) . . .

Just because the Catholic church has accepted it (the Canon of Scripture, focusing on the Old Testament) doesn’t mean that the doubt over the text and the debate about text has gone away.

Cathoholic . . .

OK. Show me IN THE BIBLE, where the New Testament Canon is listed.

Show me the verse that says . . .

. . . In the New Testament we have Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. Also Acts, Romans . . .etc. etc. Jude and Revelation.

WHERE is THAT verse medwigel?

.

The Canon is AUTHORITATIVE Oral Tradition that was never ratified until the late 300’s (probably in part because the Catholic Church was busy being persecuted).

medwigel’s response?

. . . I’m open minded enough to ask what issues they have. I then take what they tell me and apply my Bible knowledge to the issues. I would also consult my Pastor, who studies the Word . . .

.

I then take what they tell me and apply my Bible knowledge . . .

That’s just it medwigel. You can’t have any “Bible knowledge” unless there is a Bible . . . AND . . . you KNOW what that Bible is.

Without Oral Tradition, you have no idea if say, St. Matthew’s Gospel is part of Scripture or 1st and 2nd Timothy etc.

Sola Scriptura is an invention that cannot stand up to common sense medwigel. I don’t even NEED any verses to prove that.

And you quoting 2nd Timothy 3:16-17 out of context doesn’t help you.

Why?

Because it NEVER says anything about Scripture “ALONE”. (You will ALWAYS have to ADD a layer to the verse by ADDING the word “ALONE” when it’s not there).

It also ignores that he was talking to Timothy contextually about Scriptures Timothy knew from “CHILDHOOD” (in verse 15). That’d be the Old Testament medwigel in context.

Admittedly Catholics (by Tradition) take that passage and apply it to the New Testament too (but we don’t ADD the word “ALONE”).

Now before you argue that 2nd Timothy 3:16-17 means “ALONE” you are going to have to explain to me . . . . FROM SCRIPTURE ALONE . . . How you KNOW 2nd Timothy even belongs in Scripture.

You went on (bold mine) . . .

I would also consult my Pastor, who studies the Word . . .

You are INVENTING that “the Word” is reducible down to the printed page.

“The Word” can be talking about Scripture, but if you pretend it means “the Bible ALONE” that is un-Biblical (I have already shown you WHY elsewhere).

Sola Scriptura and pretending “the Word” is "“ONLY Scripture” are traditions of men that make void the commandments of God.

Your minister isn’t going to be able to give you a verse which shows you the Canon either. If she is being honest, she will admit to you that the Canon comes from AUTHORITATIVE Apostolic Tradition.

And she will get uncomfortable if you press her on the sola Scriptura issue (which is an indefensible tradition of men).

 

[phil19034]

Christ quotes Scripture to answer the Devil. That does not prove He considers Scripture the only source of truth.

Christ said: “Man does not live by bread alone.” Does that mean He claims that man does not need bread at all?
If not then the fact that we live by every word from the mouth of God can’t mean that we live by Scripture alone, even if He meant only Scripture, which there is no evidence He did.

Every word from the mouth of God: Christ is God and the Scripture says He said and did many things not recorded in Scripture.

Exactly.

No faithful Catholic would say all we need is the Eucharist without beleiveing in & living according to the Word of God.

 

[medwigel]

And she will get uncomfortable if you press her on the sola Scriptura issue (which is an indefensible tradition of men).

Actually my Pastor is insistent that anything that he teaches can be found on the Word of God. He will use other sources to support the scripture but the final authority on what he is teaching comes from the Bible.
My Pastor welcomes any question one may have about the Bible or on matters of faith. In fact, every Sunday morning he holds a question and answer session where anyone can ask any question and he guides you through the Bible to answer said questions.

 

[bobperk]

Now before you argue that 2nd Timothy 3:16-17 means “ALONE” you are going to have to explain to me . . . . FROM SCRIPTURE ALONE . . . How you KNOW 2nd Timothy even belongs in Scripture.

Not to mention that 2 Timothy was written by St. Paul no later than AD 67, while the Gospel and letters of St. John, along with Revelation, are most often dated after that…St. Paul was not referring to books not yet written.

 

[Cathoholic]

medwigel . . .

Actually my Pastor is insistent that anything that he teaches can be found on the Word of God. . . . My Pastor welcomes any question one may have about the Bible or on matters of faith. In fact, every Sunday morning he holds a question and answer session where anyone can ask any question and he guides you through the Bible to answer said questions.

.

.

Possibly Medwigel . . . .

Pastor. WHERE in the Bible is the verse that lists the New Testament Canon?

Possibly Pastor . . .

We don’t have a problem using tradition when we can verify it with the Bible medwigel. That all stems from a misunderstanding of the REAL MEANING of sola Scriptura. HERE is what the REAL DEFINITION of sola Scriptura is . . .

Possibly Medwigel . . . .

Ah hem. WHERE is that “REAL DEFINITION” of sola Scriptura found in the Bible pastor?

.

Possibly Pastor . . .

Well we look at how this has been formulated throughout the ages medwigel (this is “code” for “since the Reformation” and NOT from the Bible).

.

Possibly Medwigel . . . .

You mean your “REAL DEFINITION” of sola Scriptura is itself a tradition?

.

Possibly Pastor . . .

Well medwigel. If you look throughout the Bible and see the implied usage, you can formulate this way of defining sola Scriptura.

.

Possibly Medwigel . . . .

But HOW do you even know any of THOSE books of the Bible that you are drawing this “implied usage” from, even belong in the Bible that you are using to make such formulations?

.

Possibly Pastor . . .

Well we look at how this has been formulated throughout the ages medwigel (again, this means “since the Reformation” and NOT from the Bible).

.

Possibly Medwigel . . . .

You mean your “REAL DEFINITION” of sola Scriptura is itself a tradition?

.

Possibly Pastor . . .

Well medwigel. If you look throughout the Bible and see the implied usage, you can formulate this way of defining sola Scriptura.

.

And on and on the circular argument goes.

Try this exercise with your pastor this Sunday at your pastor’s Q&A.

And please let me know how he answered you.

.

Oh and ask . . . "What verse teaches that “the Word of God” = “The Bible ALONE”" too please.

 

[medwigel]

And on and on the circular argument goes.

Try this exercise with your pastor this Sunday at your pastor’s Q&A.

Your above argument makes absolutely no sense.
If you would like for me to ask my Pastor a question for you, you need to ask a real and clear question.
I may even have an answer for you before Sunday.

 

[Cathoholic]

medwigel . . .

If you would like for me to ask my Pastor a question for you, you need to ask a real and clear question.

.

I did.

WHERE in the Bible is the verse that lists the New Testament Canon?

 

[Agathon]

Cathoholic:

Now before you argue that 2nd Timothy 3:16-17 means “ALONE” you are going to have to explain to me . . . . FROM SCRIPTURE ALONE . . . How you KNOW 2nd Timothy even belongs in Scripture.

Not to mention that 2 Timothy was written by St. Paul no later than AD 67, while the Gospel and letters of St. John, along with Revelation, are most often dated after that…St. Paul was not referring to books not yet written.

Those writings could actually be dated in the late A.D. 40s to 60s but that’s irrelevant at this point.