Well, everything actually. You were the one that said that the Church can teach error even though they got the NT canon correct. I’m just trying to find out what it is that they taught incorrectly and why the Church cannot be trusted to teach the Truth.
the catholic church because someone already taught that docrine hint God almighty in his word ], from which the council of chalcedon gets its teaching from his word , not from the pope , nor church infalliility, get the picture scripture first , tradition second.
the church does teach the truth , and its authority come from God and his Word not from itself.
Are you referring to the Catholic Church here? If you are, that is good.
That is what I was referring to
Finally, we agree. Nor has the Church ever taught that it comes from herself. But Jesus did say the Holy Spirit would guide the Church into all truth, that is why you should accept the NT, because of Christ’s promises to the Church. And because of those promises, I accept her other teachings. I know Jesus did not just promise guidance to the Church on just the issue of the NT, but on every issue that affects my soul.
Still don’t quite see eye to eye, but by Gods grace we are getting warmer.
You are correct, man alone could not possibly get the canon of Scripture put together precisely correct, nor could they come to a correct understanding of Scripture, without the guidance of the Holy Spirit.
Dialog is very good.Still don’t quite see eye to eye, but by Gods grace we are getting warmer.
I know, I feel dirty every time I agree with you.Still don’t quite see eye to eye, but by Gods grace we are getting warmer.
But she was correct on the canon of the NT.
This is nothing but a correct articulation of the charism of infallibility in action!
But you say that tradition has to be checked by Scripture.
But Clement was a friend on an apostle.
This is exactly what the charism of infallibility is.
And this is nothing but a correct articulation of Sacred Tradition.
Yet another articulation of Sacred Tradition.
It is Tradition that gave you the canon of the NT. That came first.
:clapping:And this is nothing but a correct articulation of Sacred Tradition.
Yet another articulation of Sacred Tradition.
It is Tradition that gave you the canon of the NT. That came first.
There was no canon of the NT in the first decades.
What was in existence was the ORAL TEACHING of the Apostles. AKA…
Sacred Tradition.
THEN came the NT, in the form of 27 books discerned, infallibly, by the CC.
So first Tradition…
then…
Scripture.
Then you should have no trust that all books of the NT are theopneustos - and that no books have been left out that are.
The church can err, whenever it doesn’t teach what I think it should. I say that I am fallible, I just don’t believe I am when it comes to Church teachings.
Egg-zactly.The church can err, whenever it doesn’t teach what I think it should. I say that I am fallible, I just don’t believe I am when it comes to Church teachings.
Seriously, I have heard people question the authenticity of Paul’s letters. They say when they read them, they do not feel that they are inspired by God. I have no problem with this view. Why? Because it is the logical conclusion to the Church has erred. If she has erred on other matters, why not on this one. And don’t give me the speech that the Holy Spirit protected her in this instance. If the Holy Spirit protected her here, why not all the time?
what sorcery is this 