SPLIT: The origin of the Catholic Church & Constantine

[sennincatholic]

After finally getting through all the posts and reading the links … Yep - heard all of this before … it kind of boils down to …You Catholics just don’t get it because you listen to the Pope and the Church and the Church got it all wrong …

So really - trust me - this is what you need to do … just read the bible and believe me and whomever I get my information from - because all you really need is the Bible to know whats what … oh yes and this is how you understand what you read …



All these Protestants don’t realize that they alternate between making their individual pastors a Pope and themselves a Pope - or the guy who wrote the last blog, website, article or book that they found inspiring … and of course - everybody know which 66 books comprise the Bible and why … silly Catholics

Trust me - I’d rather follow the consistent teaching of the Church throughout history and leadership Jesus left it with faith in His promise to protect the Church through eternity

 

[Mr_Clean]

Amen

 

[JamesTheJust]

I will now respond, in a series of posts, to the criteria which the author of the article over at www.biblicaltraining.org argues should be used to determine the canon of Scripture.

1. Written by a recognized prophet or apostle

The author flat-out admits that Hebrews does not satisfy this criterion (nor does it satisfy the next one), but he says that “by a number of other criteria… It is clear that Hebrews is inspired.” So each book of the Bible doesn’t even have to satisfy all the criteria? Why is an exception made for Hebrews and not the deuterocanonicals? The author doesn’t even recognize this and pretends that it is perfectly valid to reject the deuterocanonicals for not satisfying all the criteria, but not Hebrews.

2. Written by those associated with recognized prophet or apostle

See above.

3. Truthfulness (Deut. 18:20-22)

This criteria, when used against the deuterocanonicals, is doubly fallacious. Firstly, it puts the cart before the horse. If a writing is inspired, it must be true, despite any evidence which might lead one to conclude to the contrary. So it is irrational to argue against the inspiration of a writing by saying it is untrue. Secondly, it is a double standard. Many Protestants will argue against the inspiration of the deuterocanonicals by pointing out passages that seem to contradict historical findings, such as the opening chapters of Tobit. However, one can do the same with the Gospel of Luke’s description of the census which forced Mary to give birth in Bethlehem, as well as with many passages in the Book of Daniel. There are two ways to rectify these difficulties: by using intense study of the original languages and skilled exegesis, or by pointing out that many of the passages are not meant to be precise historical narratives. Either way, both these techniques can be applied to the deuterocanonicals as well.

4. Faithfulness to previously accepted canonical writings

The author says that, since Hebrews satisfies this criterion because it “helps explain and bring to greater clarity what has been taught in the Old Covenant (Old Testament); it is now seen anew in Christ and the New Covenant is so beautifully displayed.” This criterion makes no sense. One could easily have written a book that related the Old and New Covenants. That is by no means a trait reserved for inspired books.

5. Confirmed by Christ, prophet, apostle (e.g. Luke 24:44; 2 Pet. 3:16)

In the passages from Luke the author cites, Christ mentions the OT books by genre, not name (i.e, Psalms, Prophets, etc.). Christ says nothing about which books are included in those genres. The 2 Peter passage refers to the Pauline epistles, the canonicity of which is universally undisputed among Christians. Also, I have documented in a previous post the myriad times in which Christ and the Apostles quoted the deuterocanonicals.

 

[JamesTheJust]

6. Church Usage and Recognition

The author of the article hilariously errs by claiming that the Protestant canon was recognized by the Council of Carthage in 397 and has been ever since. The Council of Carthage affirmed the 73-book Catholic canon, not the 66-book canon used by Protestants. This is demonstrable by reading Canon 24 of the Council, which can be found here:
newadvent.org/fathers/3816.htm

Furthermore, the earlier Council of Rome, in 382, recognized the Catholic canon as well. Here’s a quote from that Council’s canon documents:

"It is likewise decreed: Now, indeed, we must treat of the divine Scriptures: what the universal Catholic Church accepts and what she must shun. The list of the Old Testament begins: Genesis, one book; Exodus, one book: Leviticus, one book; Numbers, one book; Deuteronomy, one book; Jesus Nave [Joshua], one book; of Judges, one book; Ruth, one book; of Kings, four books [1 & 2 Samuel, 1 & 2 Kings]; Paralipomenon, two books [1 & 2 Chronicles]; One Hundred and Fifty Psalms, one book; of Solomon, three books: Proverbs, one book; Ecclesiastes, one book; Canticle of Canticles [Song of Songs/Song of Solomon], one book; likewise, Wisdom, one book; Ecclesiasticus (Sirach), one book;
Likewise, the list of the Prophets: Isaiah, one book; Jeremias [Jeremiah], one book; along with Cinoth, that is, his Lamentations; Ezechiel [Ezekiel], one book; Daniel, one book; Osee [Hosea], one book; Amos, one book; Micheas [Micah], one book; Joel, one book; Abdias [Obadiah], one book; Jonas [Jonah], one book; Nahum, one book; Habacuc [Habakkuk] one book; Sophonias [Zephaniah], one book; Aggeus [Haggai], one book; Zacharias [Zechariah], one book; Malachias [Malachi], one book.
Likewise, the list of histories: Job, one book; Tobias [Tobit], one book; Esdras, two books [Ezra, Nehemiah]; Esther, one book; Judith, one book; Maccabees, two books…
Likewise it is decreed: After the announcement of all of these prophetic and evangelic or as well as apostolic writings which we have listed above as Scriptures, on which, by the grace of God, the Catholic Church is founded, we have considered that it ought to be announced that although all the Catholic Churches spread abroad through the world comprise but one bridal chamber of Christ, nevertheless, the holy Roman Church has been placed at the forefront not by the conciliar decisions of other Churches, but has received the primacy by the evangelic voice of our Lord and Savior, who says: “You are Peter, and upon this rock I will build My Church, and the gates of hell will not prevail against it; and I will give to you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you shall have bound on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you shall have loosed on earth shall be loosed in heaven.” (I added the brackets to give the current titles of books whose titles have changed over the years).

Protestants can scramble all they want to find a patristic source that recognized the current Protestant canon, but they just won’t be able to do it.

 

[steve_b]

James the Just #48

Apparently you didn’t read the article or you wouldn’t have made that comment. It might also interest you to realize that the Scriptures were inspired by the Holy Spirit to various Godly men over a period of 1500 or so years.

Ask yourself, how do you prove that statement? By what authority are you basing that statement on? There were 100’s and 100’s of books written in that time. How is it only 73 books (46 OT + 27 NT) made it into the canon?

Oh… and why do you believe protestants to the one true faith, who have 66 books not 73 books, are correct? Where is THEIR authority?
cl:

So it wasn’t the decision of ‘one man’ as to what was accepted or rejected over the years.

A Catholic Church council decided, and the pope validated and confirmed the result of the council. That’s fact.
cl:

There Have been various articles written by various people Explaining the criteria used over those many years.

the writers of the NT, (Peter, Paul, James, John, Matthew, Mark, Luke, etc) are all in the Church they write to and for. That’s the Catholic Church. iow, the Catholic Church wrote the NT and canonized it . And since the Catholic Church in the beginning was 100% Jewish, And Jesus being the one the OT looked forward to, and wrote about, therefore the only Church Jesus established and gave all His promises to, The Catholic Church, knew the OT intimately as well. And the Catholic Church canonized 73 books.

As for Constantine, he became Catholic. The Catholic Church had already been there for 295 years. That’s why the Nicene council in 325 made it an article of faith in the creed.

 

[adrift]

Were the Early Christians Roman Catholics? by Mary Ann Collins

Mary Ann (if she exists) makes the claim that there is historical evidence that the Catholic Church began with Constantine. I expected to find this evidence presented in her article but I found none. Mary Ann uses the fallacy of poisoning the well. She presents the character of Constantine as the only evidence to her claim. I doubt if anyone would dispute that he was not a sinful man. She states that Constantine made Sunday a day of rest which she points out was the day of the sun god. What she doesn’t acknowledge is that Christians were honoring Sunday as the day of the Lord from the time of Jesus’ resurrection. The fact the he made it a day of rest shows his conversion which the article denies. The evidence was the bad character of Constantine and that the Christians were no loner being persecuted. What is not addressed are even alluded to is the beliefs of the Christians. She merely states that 314 A.D. was the birth of the “Roman Catholic Church” a name that didn’t even exist until the Protestant rebellion.
The statement that Catholic Church only copied and preserved the Bible, which God had already given to us made me think she thought that the Bible dropped from the sky.
The rest of the article are full of historical inaccuracies and twisting of events.

 

[crochet_lady]

I also looked up Mary Ann Collins – found several articles about her and some pictures. Is it possible that her life story Isn’t appreciated Because she saw fit to Leave the RCC For some years her brother and his wife were also RC and chose to leave the RCC. LOTS of people from the RCC choose to leave and find through their own study of Scripture that Jesus Christ IS the Way , the Truth and the Life and No man comes to the Father, but through Him.

As for Who wrote the Bible – another good article
“Who Wrote the Bible” www.bibleexplained.org

Type in the name of the article I’ve found that web addresses don’t always get the person directly to the article named.

There are several other articles about that by several different sources.

Would also like to comment about the Church – it needs to be specified Which ‘Church’ is being referred to. Jesus chose His first disciples as recorded in the Gospels. When Jesus Christ rose from the grave – His bodily resurrection Proved He was, indeed,God’s Son and not simply another religious teacher. Then In Acts 1 He ascends back to the Father in Heaven. And on the Day of Pentecost in ch 2, the Holy Spirit comes to indwell individual believers. And then we have the Great Commission – Jesus Christ is talking to his disciples. Mathew 28 and in Luke 24:47 "and that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in His name to all nations, beginning at Jerusalem. The disciples of Jesus were told to start from home and were to share Gospel and teach / making More disciples spreading out to the rest of the world. This is NOT the beginning of the Roman Catholic church.
That Was developed over time starting with Constantine and his supposed conversion to Christianity. Apparently his life didn’t show much Christianity / Godliness.
There was a time of persecution of believers – a lot of whom tried to avoid the persecution and Christianity Did spread to other regions as a result. But there were Also groups who gradually departed from New Testament Bible regarding church government, worship and practice. Some of the local churches ceased to be autonomous and gave way to the control of the ‘bishops’ ruling over hierarchies.
Back to Constantine – he began to worship the ‘sun god’ due to some sort of ‘vision’ he had. Over the years he wanted to build his empire by adopting rituals, worship practices of various other belief systems.
So - the Roman Empirer Constantine established himself as the head of the church around 313A.d. which made this new "Christianity’ the official religion of the Roman Empire. .And the 1st Pope was either Leo 1 (440-461A.D) or Gregory1(590-604A.D.)

So - given a choice between following Jesus Christ / the Son of God the Church He started - Jesus Christ being the Head OR the R.C.C. with fallible people as the Head — I’ll stay with the Church that Jesus Christ is the Head of.

 

[JamesTheJust]

I also looked up Mary Ann Collins – found several articles about her and some pictures. Is it possible that her life story Isn’t appreciated Because she saw fit to Leave the RCC For some years her brother and his wife were also RC and chose to leave the RCC. LOTS of people from the RCC choose to leave and find through their own study of Scripture that Jesus Christ IS the Way , the Truth and the Life and No man comes to the Father, but through Him.

As for Who wrote the Bible – another good article
“Who Wrote the Bible” www.bibleexplained.org

Type in the name of the article I’ve found that web addresses don’t always get the person directly to the article named.

There are several other articles about that by several different sources.

Would also like to comment about the Church – it needs to be specified Which ‘Church’ is being referred to. Jesus chose His first disciples as recorded in the Gospels. When Jesus Christ rose from the grave – His bodily resurrection Proved He was, indeed,God’s Son and not simply another religious teacher. Then In Acts 1 He ascends back to the Father in Heaven. And on the Day of Pentecost in ch 2, the Holy Spirit comes to indwell individual believers. And then we have the Great Commission – Jesus Christ is talking to his disciples. Mathew 28 and in Luke 24:47 "and that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in His name to all nations, beginning at Jerusalem. The disciples of Jesus were told to start from home and were to share Gospel and teach / making More disciples spreading out to the rest of the world. This is NOT the beginning of the Roman Catholic church.
That Was developed over time starting with Constantine and his supposed conversion to Christianity. Apparently his life didn’t show much Christianity / Godliness.
There was a time of persecution of believers – a lot of whom tried to avoid the persecution and Christianity Did spread to other regions as a result. But there were Also groups who gradually departed from New Testament Bible regarding church government, worship and practice. Some of the local churches ceased to be autonomous and gave way to the control of the ‘bishops’ ruling over hierarchies.
Back to Constantine – he began to worship the ‘sun god’ due to some sort of ‘vision’ he had. Over the years he wanted to build his empire by adopting rituals, worship practices of various other belief systems.
So - the Roman Empirer Constantine established himself as the head of the church around 313A.d. which made this new "Christianity’ the official religion of the Roman Empire. .And the 1st Pope was either Leo 1 (440-461A.D) or Gregory1(590-604A.D.)

So - given a choice between following Jesus Christ / the Son of God the Church He started - Jesus Christ being the Head OR the R.C.C. with fallible people as the Head — I’ll stay with the Church that Jesus Christ is the Head of.

Thanks for providing tons of historical evidence and facts to back up your gigantic premise!

Oh wait…

 

[YADA]

I also looked up Mary Ann Collins – found several articles about her and some pictures. Is it possible that her life story Isn’t appreciated Because she saw fit to Leave the RCC For some years her brother and his wife were also RC and chose to leave the RCC. LOTS of people from the RCC choose to leave and find through their own study of Scripture that Jesus Christ IS the Way , the Truth and the Life and No man comes to the Father, but through Him.

As for Who wrote the Bible – another good article
“Who Wrote the Bible” www.bibleexplained.org

Type in the name of the article I’ve found that web addresses don’t always get the person directly to the article named.

There are several other articles about that by several different sources.

Would also like to comment about the Church – it needs to be specified Which ‘Church’ is being referred to. Jesus chose His first disciples as recorded in the Gospels. When Jesus Christ rose from the grave – His bodily resurrection Proved He was, indeed,God’s Son and not simply another religious teacher. Then In Acts 1 He ascends back to the Father in Heaven. And on the Day of Pentecost in ch 2, the Holy Spirit comes to indwell individual believers. And then we have the Great Commission – Jesus Christ is talking to his disciples. Mathew 28 and in Luke 24:47 "and that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in His name to all nations, beginning at Jerusalem. The disciples of Jesus were told to start from home and were to share Gospel and teach / making More disciples spreading out to the rest of the world. This is NOT the beginning of the Roman Catholic church.
That Was developed over time starting with Constantine and his supposed conversion to Christianity. Apparently his life didn’t show much Christianity / Godliness.
There was a time of persecution of believers – a lot of whom tried to avoid the persecution and Christianity Did spread to other regions as a result. But there were Also groups who gradually departed from New Testament Bible regarding church government, worship and practice. Some of the local churches ceased to be autonomous and gave way to the control of the ‘bishops’ ruling over hierarchies.
Back to Constantine – he began to worship the ‘sun god’ due to some sort of ‘vision’ he had. Over the years he wanted to build his empire by adopting rituals, worship practices of various other belief systems.
So - the Roman Empirer Constantine established himself as the head of the church around 313A.d. which made this new "Christianity’ the official religion of the Roman Empire. .And the 1st Pope was either Leo 1 (440-461A.D) or Gregory1(590-604A.D.)

So - given a choice between following Jesus Christ / the Son of God the Church He started - Jesus Christ being the Head OR the R.C.C. with fallible people as the Head — I’ll stay with the Church that Jesus Christ is the Head of.

Oh my … and you can prove your ‘opinions’ with what historical evidence? … Zip, Zero, Nada …

Sorry Crochet Lady … just because someone says something or even believes something does not make it a fact or a truth - so matter how plausible it sounds … and in what you have posted - well not much is even plausible on its face - let alone historical … I really feel for you - you want so much to rewrite history into your vision of how it should have been but was not … and the facts are just not on your side …

 

[JamesTheJust]

…As for Who wrote the Bible – another good article
“Who Wrote the Bible” www.bibleexplained.org

So - given a choice between following Jesus Christ / the Son of God the Church He started - Jesus Christ being the Head OR the R.C.C. with fallible people as the Head — I’ll stay with the Church that Jesus Christ is the Head of.

No, people don’t appreciate Mary Ann Collins because her story is as bogus as Alberto Rivera’s.

Thanks for the article, I’ll check it out and possibly refute it when I have more time.

Your last paragraph is a classic example of the unnecessarily dichotomous Protestant mindset. Also, could you point me to that church, of which you claim to be a member, that is headed directly by Christ, with not a single man or woman involved? You can’t be referring to the Southern Baptist Convention, because, well, that’s run by Fred Luter Jr. Nor can you be referring to any other Baptist organization, because those are all run by people. Unless you want to argue that the head of your particular Baptist organization is Christ incarnate, you’ve just refuted yourself.

 

[Mr_Clean]

Question for Crochet Lady - why are you on this website taking up precious time trying to “teach” Catholics about the Catholic Church? You know what you know and nobody is going to change your mind.

Unless you are having doubts the Baptists are right and you are church shopping I don’t get it. I suppose you see the Catholic Church as the whore of babylon and you are here doing missionary work.

Thanks for being concerned for our souls. I’ll pray for you too.

 

[adf417]

There was a time of persecution of believers – …

The only thing wrong with this statement is it is in past tense only form.

My prayers go out to all of you still trying to minister to crochet lady and point her to the truth. Although it seems you are doing a very good job, one can get discouraged when issues are just not dealt with. It probably just a matter of time before she plays the “all priest are child molesters” card instead of dealing with the truth of what she has already brought up.

Peace to all, including crochet lady!!!

 

[adrift]

I also looked up Mary Ann Collins – found several articles about her and some pictures. Is it possible that her life story Isn’t appreciated Because she saw fit to Leave the RCC For some years her brother and his wife were also RC and chose to leave the RCC. LOTS of people from the RCC choose to leave and find through their own study of Scripture that Jesus Christ IS the Way , the Truth and the Life and No man comes to the Father, but through Him.

Anything is possible but the probability is that she misrepresents herself. She claims an expertise that is shown to be false. However, a non-catholic would not pick up on it. Her lies would be accepted as truth as you have done. Jesus is the Way, the Truth and the life. He gave the keys to heaven to Peter and these keys were passed on to his successor. Peter had a name change that is always ignored by those who wish to say that Peter (rock) was not the rock that Jesus said he would build His Church upon. They do all sorts of word gymnastics to say that Peter wasn’t the rock. They speak to the Greek as if the Apostles spoke Greek They ignore that Jesus spoke in Aramaic and that Peter’s name was Cepahs which is Aramaic for Rock no other meaning just rock. To follow Jesus totally is to be in His Church which He founded on Peter(Cephas) Rock.

 

[steve_b]

I also looked up Mary Ann Collins – found several articles about her and some pictures. Is it possible that her life story Isn’t appreciated Because she saw fit to Leave the RCC For some years her brother and his wife were also RC and chose to leave the RCC. LOTS of people from the RCC choose to leave and find through their own study of Scripture that Jesus Christ IS the Way , the Truth and the Life and No man comes to the Father, but through Him.

If they don’t believe in the Catholic Church who gave us the scriptures how can one say they believe in the scriptures? That position is contradictory. It’s to believe in neither. All one is doing then, is believing in themselves.
cl:

As for Who wrote the Bible – another good article
“Who Wrote the Bible” www.bibleexplained.org
Type in the name of the article I’ve found that web addresses don’t always get the person directly to the article named. There are several other articles about that by several different sources.

We know the Catholic Church wrote the NT. The Catholic Church, canonized 73 books that we call the bible.

what you have to do then, is disprove the following

the Church of Rome, is the Church Paul wrote to.

Be sure to open the links.

• St Ignatius Bp of Antioch, from ~69 a.d. - ~107 a.d., ordained by apostles, direct disciple of St John the apostle, wrote the Church the Catholic Church Epistle to the Smyrnæans of which schismatics won’t be going to heavenEpistle to the Philadelphians
• St Polycarp, Bp Smyrna, disciple of St John called the Church the “Catholic Church” The Martyrdom of Polycarp
• Muratorian canon earlychristianwritings.com/text/muratorian.html called the Church the Catholic Church
• Irenaeus ~180 a.d. wrote “Against Heresies” called the Church the “Catholic Church” Adversus haereses [Bk 1 http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0103110.htm”]Chapter 10 v 3], and also Irenaeus who was taught by Polycarp, teaches all must agree with Rome [Bk 3, http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0103303.htm”]Chapter 3, v 2-3]
• Cyprian~250 a.d. Epistle 54
• The Nicene Creed, 325 a.d., said it’s a matter of faith to believe in the “One Holy Catholic Apostolic Church”
• Augustine ~395 There are many other things that most justly keep me in her * bosom. . . . The succession of priests keeps me, beginning from the very seat of the Apostle Peter, [snip] . And so, lastly, does the name itself of Catholic, [snip] though all heretics wish to be called Catholics, yet when a stranger asks where the Catholic Church meets, no heretic will venture to point to his own chapel or house. Against the Epistle of Manichaeus Called Fundamental ch 5 v 6

btw, while Ignatius wrote about the Catholic Church, he didn’t invent the name. It means Peter, Paul, James John, Matthew, Mark, Luke, etc were all in the Church they wrote to and for. Which means they are Catholics in the Catholic Church.
cl:

This is NOT the beginning of the Roman Catholic church. That Was developed over time starting with Constantine and his supposed conversion to Christianity. So - the Roman Empirer Constantine established himself as the head of the church around 313A.d. which made this new "Christianity’ the official religion of the Roman Empire. .And the 1st Pope was either Leo 1 (440-461A.D) or Gregory1(590-604A.D.)

So - given a choice between following Jesus Christ / the Son of God the Church He started - Jesus Christ being the Head OR the R.C.C. with fallible people as the Head — I’ll stay with the Church that Jesus Christ is the Head of.

Those links I gave above are from primry sources. Here’s how types of sources are ranked in terms of importance for evidence. Note primary sources are at the top in the list of importance lib.umd.edu/ues/guides/primary-sources

What you give to support your opinion is personal opinion about the subject. One’s personal opinion is NOT classified as evidence. However, when repeatedly asked for evidence, and none is given, It’s evidence that one doesn’t have evidence, just opinion*

 

[spina1953]

If they don’t believe in the Catholic Church who gave us the scriptures how can one say they believe in the scriptures? That position is contradictory. It’s to believe in neither. All one is doing then, is believing in themselves.

We know the Catholic Church wrote the NT. The Catholic Church, canonized 73 books that we call the bible.

what you have to do then, is disprove the following

the Church of Rome, is the Church Paul wrote to.

Be sure to open the links.

• St Ignatius Bp of Antioch, from ~69 a.d. - ~107 a.d., ordained by apostles, direct disciple of St John the apostle, wrote the Church the Catholic Church Epistle to the Smyrnæans of which schismatics won’t be going to heavenEpistle to the Philadelphians
• St Polycarp, Bp Smyrna, disciple of St John called the Church the “Catholic Church” The Martyrdom of Polycarp
• Muratorian canon earlychristianwritings.com/text/muratorian.html called the Church the Catholic Church
• Irenaeus ~180 a.d. wrote “Against Heresies” called the Church the “Catholic Church” Adversus haereses [Bk 1 http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0103110.htm”]Chapter 10

v 3], and also Irenaeus who was taught by Polycarp, teaches all must agree with Rome [Bk 3, http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0103303.htm”]Chapter 3, v 2-3]

• Cyprian~250 a.d. Epistle 54
• The Nicene Creed, 325 a.d., said it’s a matter of faith to believe in the “One Holy Catholic Apostolic Church”
• Augustine ~395 There are many other things that most justly keep me in her * bosom. . . . The succession of priests keeps me, beginning from the very seat of the Apostle Peter, [snip] . And so, lastly, does the name itself of Catholic, [snip] though all heretics wish to be called Catholics, yet when a stranger asks where the Catholic Church meets, no heretic will venture to point to his own chapel or house. Against the Epistle of Manichaeus Called Fundamental ch 5 v 6

btw, while Ignatius wrote about the Catholic Church, he didn’t invent the name. It means Peter, Paul, James John, Matthew, Mark, Luke, etc were all in the Church they wrote to and for. Which means they are Catholics in the Catholic Church.

Those links I gave above are from primry sources. Here’s how types of sources are ranked in terms of importance for evidence. Note primary sources are at the top in the list of importance lib.umd.edu/ues/guides/primary-sources

What you give to support your opinion is personal opinion about the subject. One’s personal opinion is NOT classified as evidence. However, when repeatedly asked for evidence, and none is given, It’s evidence that one doesn’t have evidence, just opinion*

Great post!!! Lots of good information. As you most likely know not everything on the internet is reliable information. Anyone can write what they want and of course there will be those who are gullible and believe whatever is written because they think it is true. Primary sources are always the best sources to go to. However, no matter what one shows to be true there will be those who will refuse to believe because it is not what they were taught to believe.

 

[JamesTheJust]

As for Who wrote the Bible – another good article
“Who Wrote the Bible” www.bibleexplained.org

That link doesn’t work either. It just goes to a GoDaddy page full of ads.

 

[crochet_lady]

To get caught up with all the posts – this Is Christmas time and lots going on.

James the Just # 58
Your sarcasm duly noted The Holy Spirit Does speak – Whomever is willing to listen is another matter.
Martin Luther simply got people Thinking and not simply willing to believe everything someone else told them.
Actually, the Holy Spirit Does speak to people – teaches, guides continually – those are His jobs.
As to Who decided about those books – “What criteria were used to determine the canon of Scripture” Don’t know what article You found.
There was another poster who didn’t take much of that seriously. That’s his problem, not mine.

Yada # 60
Yes, by all means Read your Bible / God’s Word/ on your own --By yourself. And, yes, the Holy Spirit is pretty good at teaching us.
At the moment a person accepts Jesus Christ as Savior, the Holy Spirit comes to indwell the person – the believer receives at least one spiritual gift – Ephesians 4: 11-14 “And He, Himself, gave some to be apostles, some prophets, some evangelists, and some pastors and teachers, for the equipping of the saints for the work of ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ. till we all come to the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, …”
Romans 1:16 For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ, for it is the power of God to salvation for everyone who believes, for the Jew first and also for the Greek."
Romans 12: 6 - 8 “Having then gifts differing according to the grace that is given to us, let us use them: Of prophecy let us prophesy in proportion to our faith; Or ministry , let us uses it in our ministering; he who teaches, in teaching, … in exorting, …in giving, he who leads with diligence ; he who shows mercy, with cheerfulness.”
Then there are qualifications for those wishing to be a bishop / overseer of a group of believers – Titus 1:7 - 9 / 1 Timothy 3:1 - 8
Will continue shortly :)

 

[Mr_Clean]

If the Holy Spirit is teaching individuals how to interpret Scripture then how do you explain so many different interpretations?

Either God is crazy or this idea is false.

…or maybe??? Oh, nevermind you don’t want to “hear” the Truth as it has been handed down by the Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church.

 

[JamesTheJust]

James the Just # 58
Your sarcasm duly noted The Holy Spirit Does speak – Whomever is willing to listen is another matter.
Martin Luther simply got people Thinking and not simply willing to believe everything someone else told them.
Actually, the Holy Spirit Does speak to people – teaches, guides continually – those are His jobs.
As to Who decided about those books – “What criteria were used to determine the canon of Scripture” Don’t know what article You found.

So the Holy Spirit has been speaking and guiding Protestants since Martin Luther “got people thinking”? The Holy Spirit guided individuals to create 40,000 different denominations which all contradict each other?

We agree that the Holy Spirit continually guides and teaches. However, you believe that He guides a church which has split and contradicted itself 40,000 times in the past 500 years, whereas I believe that He guides the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church, which remains undivided after 2,000 years.

I found the article to which you referred us. I read it, and I refuted it.

 

[crochet_lady]

Responding now to Steve b # 65
A study Bible – mine is the old NIV study Bible – at the beginning of each book a person will find the date / author / place of writing / recipient / purpose, etc.
You said the Catholic Church wrote the New Testament? Well – looking at the beginning of the books of Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, 1 & 2 Thessalonians, and ! & 2 Timothy. — Paul was the writer of those with Timothy for one of them. James wrote the book of James.
In 1408 in England, it becomes illegal to translate or read the bible in common English without permission of a bishop.
Erasmus, a priest and Greek scholar, publishes a new Greek edition and a more accurate Latin translation of the New Testament in 1516 . His goal is that everyone be able to read the Bible, from the farmer in the field to the weaver at the loom.
Alfred The Great, King of Wessex (871 - 901) translates portions of Exodus, Psalms, and Acts.
The First English Bible is translated from Latin in 1382 and is called the Wycliffe Bible --he had wanted common people to have the Bible.
The Coverdale Bible is translated by Miles Coverdale (1535) and is the 1st complete Bible to be printed in English
And the Geneva Bible in 1560 – then eight years later comes the Bishops Bible.
THEN the Rheims-Douai Bible was translated into English from the Latin Vuilage by Catholic scholar Gregory Martin, New Testament in 1609 / Old Testament 1582) It becomes the standard translation for the Catholic Church.

Paul wrote to the church at Rome And Corinth And Galatia and numerous locations close by there.  Yes, there were a Bunch of locations that Paul wrote to.  Under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit with God as the Main author.

I had just previously mentioned the spiritual gifts given to believers and the qualifications for elders/ deacons. Because Scripture gives us a Structure of leadership. God is creator – His Son , Jesus Christ, the Head of the New Testament church – with earthly leadership of pastors / elders of individual groups of believers. Hebrew tells us Not to forsake getting together with other believers on a regular basis because we Need to fellow ship with others. Reading God’s Word together, left each other up, worship together.
And there Are groups formed GARBS, Regular Baptists, Independent, Southern, Northern. But they are Not Mandated. No group Mandates the leadership or beliefs of Anyone. Churches vote to be included or NOT in any of these groups.
Any church I’ve gone to – anyone who questions what the pastor is teaching is free to go and ask the pastor the why’s and wherefores. And the pastor is supposed to go to Scripture to verify – to compare Scripture to Scripture with the person. They are seeking Godly wisdom. And there Are pastors who take more authority than Scripture gives them.
When we have a question – we are responsible to God / His Word – but it’s Easier to go to a person and be Told what to do. But - ultimately we Are responsible for our Own actions.