The CC "got it right" on the NT canon? How do you know?

[Protestor]

scripture

I think you are missing the RCC’s 1st and 2nd premises as I see it for this issue. 1 we were given the scriptures by God 2 we were entrusted with keeping these scriptures. These two premises are an important part of a larger Tradition within the RCC. To talk about “scripture” or “scriptural definitions” at all you have to first accept that the RCC was given some form of authority over these two things. Since you cannot claim these premises for yourself you must accept the NT canon was under the authority(no matter how much supervision you think the Lord had) of the RCC(or the universal church if that makes you feel better). Even I presume these 2 premises, but not the way that most catholics do. Unless you have better ones, because if you do I will gladly cut the cord. Also anything that I got wrong (catholics) I will gladly retract, but don’t get too greedy rewording with those premises.

So when PR(nice use of contravene by the way) says you “tacitly accept the authority of the RCC” this is basically what she means. The next question in this line will usually be "how do you distinguish between the this authority that you are willing(have to) to accept and any other authority that the RCC claims to have?"if neither of them are really explicitly scriptural. Then whatever reason you give is wrong.

PR I bet you didn’t think I would help you out on this one. I don’t remember if I have denied tacit submission in the past. I want to see that astonishment that I am used to.

 

[PRmerger]

So you try quoting from a heretical site and put it on par with Protestants , insulting to say the least ,

They are Protestants, and how dare you say that their views don’t count.

You are doing exactly what the CC did to your denomination.

You are being a magisterium to these groups and saying, “This is the correct way to interpret Scripture. And this is what belongs in the canon!”

But yet you don’t believe the Catholic magisterium has authority over you.

And are you saying that these “heretical” groups don’t have a right to splinter from their original group because of theological differences?

If so, then you’d better not be a Lutheran, because that’s exactly what Luther did.

 

[Starwarsfan2]

They are Protestants, and how dare you say that their views don’t count.

You are doing exactly what the CC did to your denomination.

You are being a magisterium to these groups and saying, “This is the correct way to interpret Scripture. And this is what belongs in the canon!”

But yet you don’t believe the Catholic magisterium has authority over you.

And are you saying that these “heretical” groups don’t have a right to splinter from their original group because of theological differences?

If so, then you’d better not be a Lutheran, because that’s exactly what Luther did.

They cut out half of the canon , they are not Protestant.

 

[PRmerger]

So you try quoting from a heretical site and put it on par with Protestants , insulting to say the least ,
And again three options not two :
1.One denomination
2.Denominations see just subdivisions of churches wich are grouped according to belief ( my definition)

Oh, I accept your option #2.

But you and I know that the Church of the Nazarene as different beliefs from the Acts Mission Church which has different beliefs from the Freedom Worship Center which has different beliefs from the New Christian Union Church which has different beliefs from the New World Apostolic Church which has different beliefs from the New Covenant Church.

Each of those churches, and hundreds of thousands of independent churches like this, started when 1 man disagreed theologically with his pastor, said, “I read the Bible differently than you do and you are wrong. I will start my own church!”

And that means tens of thousands of different denominations.

That is the fruit of the Protestant Reformation

 

[PRmerger]

They cut out half of the canon , they are not Protestant.

They are doing exactly what your ancestors did. Divorcing themselves from the branch which supported them.

So either they can’t do what they’re doing…

but that’s a problem for you because your church did exactly that.

Or your church has the right to exist and to have divorced itself from its branch…

but that also means that you have to acknowledge the legitimacy of these Protestant splinterings as well.

Either/Or here.

 

[PRmerger]

and most nondenominational local churches are Anabaptist.

This is so ridiculously wrong.

 

[PRmerger]

I think you are missing the RCC’s 1st and 2nd premises as I see it for this issue. 1 we were given the scriptures by God 2 we were entrusted with keeping these scriptures. These two premises are an important part of a larger Tradition within the RCC. To talk about “scripture” or “scriptural definitions” at all you have to first accept that the RCC was given some form of authority over these two things. Since you cannot claim these premises for yourself you must accept the NT canon was under the authority(no matter how much supervision you think the Lord had) of the RCC(or the universal church if that makes you feel better). Even I presume these 2 premises, but not the way that most catholics do. Unless you have better ones, because if you do I will gladly cut the cord. Also anything that I got wrong (catholics) I will gladly retract, but don’t get too greedy rewording with those premises.

So when PR(nice use of contravene by the way) says you “tacitly accept the authority of the RCC” this is basically what she means. The next question in this line will usually be "how do you distinguish between the this authority that you are willing(have to) to accept and any other authority that the RCC claims to have?"if neither of them are really explicitly scriptural. Then whatever reason you give is wrong.

PR I bet you didn’t think I would help you out on this one. I don’t remember if I have denied tacit submission in the past. I want to see that astonishment that I am used to.

:dancing::extrahappy::bowdown::bowdown2::bowdown2::bowdown2:

 

[Starwarsfan2]

Oh, I accept your option #2.

But you and I know that the Church of the Nazarene as different beliefs from the Acts Mission Church which has different beliefs from the Freedom Worship Center which has different beliefs from the New Christian Union Church which has different beliefs from the New World Apostolic Church which has different beliefs from the New Covenant Church.

Each of those churches, and hundreds of thousands of independent churches like this, started when 1 man disagreed theologically with his pastor, said, “I read the Bible differently than you do and you are wrong. I will start my own church!”

And that means tens of thousands of different denominations.

That is the fruit of the Protestant Reformation/QUOTE

First the church of the Nazarene is a subdivision of the Westlyan church
Second minor splits you mention form new local churches, not denominations , so that means only a few actual churches ?

The fruit of the reformation is error cut out of the church , the truth of the gospel being preached to the nations and 965 million more people following Christ , if you would stop screaming schism for a second you would realize that.( not insulting you , just being honest ok )

 

[PRmerger]

I think you are missing the RCC’s 1st and 2nd premises as I see it for this issue. 1 we were given the scriptures by God 2 we were entrusted with keeping these scriptures. These two premises are an important part of a larger Tradition within the RCC. To talk about “scripture” or “scriptural definitions” at all you have to first accept that the RCC was given some form of authority over these two things. Since you cannot claim these premises for yourself you must accept the NT canon was under the authority(no matter how much supervision you think the Lord had) of the RCC(or the universal church if that makes you feel better). Even I presume these 2 premises, but not the way that most catholics do. Unless you have better ones, because if you do I will gladly cut the cord. Also anything that I got wrong (catholics) I will gladly retract, but don’t get too greedy rewording with those premises.

I will amend the above to say that it is not the Roman Catholic Church that received the Scriptures, but the Catholic Church.

The Church is not Roman.

The Roman, or Latin, rite is only one of about 20 different rites, all members of the Catholic Church and loyal to the Holy See.

 

[PRmerger]

First the church of the Nazarene is a subdivision of the Westlyan church

Well, only in the same way that the Westboro Baptist Church is a subdivison of the Baptist Church.

And in the same way that the Baptist Church is a subdivison of the CC.

However, I suggest you start talking doctrines with the members of the Church of the Nazarene, and they will disagree vehemently with the doctrines of the Wesleyan church.

That’s why they…split.

Second minor splits you mention form new local churches, not denominations , so that means only a few actual churches ?

If they have their own doctrines and their own leadership, they are their own denomination.

The fruit of the reformation is error cut out of the church , the truth of the gospel being preached to the nations and 965 million more people following Christ

…and now the chaos and confusion of tens of thousands of differing denominations, each teaching different, sometimes contrary, doctrines.

Now, there’s no agreement on whether baptism saves? or is it an ordinance? or should it be done in a river? or in adulthood? or in infancy?

There is no agreement on whether one can lose his salvation or it’s a done deal.

There is no agreement on whether the Sabbath is the day of worship or it’s Sunday.

There is no agreement on whether the books of Paul are theopneustos or they are the work of Satan.

That’s all the fruit of the divorce from the One Church started by Christ.

Each man gets to read the Bible and decide for himself what it means.

And that has led to the obscenity of tens of thousands of denominations.

#chaos
#confusion

 

[PRmerger]

So when PR(nice use of contravene by the way) says you “tacitly accept the authority of the RCC” this is basically what she means. The next question in this line will usually be "how do you distinguish between the this authority that you are willing(have to) to accept and any other authority that the RCC claims to have?"if neither of them are really explicitly scriptural. Then whatever reason you give is wrong.

That is a good next question.

But the question I usually segue to is: so if you believe that the Catholic Church was given the charism of infallibility in discerning the canon of the NT, why don’t you believe that she has it in other areas?

 

[JMM1957]

PRmerger;13325874:

The fruit of the reformation is error cut out of the church , the truth of the gospel being preached to the nations and 965 million more people following Christ , if you would stop screaming schism for a second you would realize that.( not insulting you , just being honest ok )

And then the reformation continued to produce its own errors. You see it as an improvement?

 

[PRmerger]

And then the reformation continued to produce its own errors. You see it as an improvement?

Hi there. Would you mind amending the above post to remove my name? I think starwarsfan posted that!

I think there’s something wrong with the quoting system at the moment.

 

[Michael68]

Oh, I accept your option #2.

But you and I know that the Church of the Nazarene as different beliefs from the Acts Mission Church which has different beliefs from the Freedom Worship Center which has different beliefs from the New Christian Union Church which has different beliefs from the New World Apostolic Church which has different beliefs from the New Covenant Church.

Each of those churches, and hundreds of thousands of independent churches like this, started when 1 man disagreed theologically with his pastor, said, “I read the Bible differently than you do and you are wrong. I will start my own church!”

And that means tens of thousands of different denominations.

That is the fruit of the Protestant Reformation

This is so true!!! We have three churches in my area that started that way and neither is more than ten years old.

 

[clem456]

Oh, I accept your option #2.

 

[Protestor]

I will amend the above to say that it is not the Roman Catholic Church that received the Scriptures, but the Catholic Church.

An acceptable revision. Though I think our audience has retreated

 

[JMM1957]

Post # 432
The fruit of the reformation is error cut out of the church , the truth of the gospel being preached to the nations and 965 million more people following Christ , if you would stop screaming schism for a second you would realize that.( not insulting you , just being honest ok )

Just amending the above post, PMmerger didn’t post this, Starwarsfan2 did, quoting system made a mistake.

 

[rcwitness]

To me, the more trust that I put in believing the Scriptures are
“Theopneustos” (or God-breathed), the more I rely on the Church having the ability to declare infallibly which writings were to be received as Scripture.

:bible1:

 

[rcwitness]

and most nondenominational local churches are Anabaptist.

I invited my brother in law to my baby boy’s Baptism this coming Sunday.

He is Anabaptist…

I asked him this:

Do you think the way the Church relied on the Tradition of infant Baptism is any different than how she collected, discerned and declared which writings were to be upheld as belonging in the body of Scripture (Bible)?

He gave a great answer. “I don’t have enough understanding to answer that.”

I am glad he is going to be there. He supports the influence of Jesus on our children. He needs help understanding. He was swept away by non-denominational enthusiasm. It had it pros, but also cons. Preaching a basic Gospel of Christ crucified doesn’t negate the mysteries of Truth. The Mass proclaims Christ crucified in a bold, clear manner… then offers participation in His sacrifice

 

[Arizona_Samson]

An acceptable revision. Though I think our audience has retreated

No retreating from this portion of the audience, I’m preaching out of town and am busy working on this weekend’s message. Lord willing I’ll be back early next week to respond to all comments. Thank you for you patience.