The Origin of the Bible

  • Thread starter Thread starter Bill_Pick
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
historyb said:
I deny your take on it, the books were around as a loose compilation long before any council decided on them. Do some homework
Click to expand...
But which of the more than 300 different texts were scripture? It was the Church that declared the 73 that were authentic
 
historyb said:
No it was the Holy Spirit
Click to expand...
The Holy Spirit acting through the Church at the Council of Hippo and the Council of Carthage. Before these councils there was no concensus on the Canon. Afterward there was. It is becoming clear that you are one of theose Protestants who refuses to give the Church credit for anything, no matter what the facts are.
 
That is blatantly not true.
Nonetheless, a full dogmatic articulation of the canon was not made until the Council of Trent of 1546 for Roman Catholicism, the Thirty-Nine Articles of 1563 for the Church of England, the Westminster Confession of Faith of 1647 for British Calvinism, and the Synod of Jerusalem of 1672 for the Greek Orthodox.
Click to expand...
Source

The problem is the RCC wants credit for everything
 
CWBetts said:
The Holy Spirit acting through the Church at the Council of Hippo and the Council of Carthage. Before these councils there was no concensus on the Canon. Afterward there was.
Click to expand...
After the councils of Carthage and Hippo you seem to think there was a consensus that agreed with the canon they put forth. What does “consensus” mean to you?
 
SemperReformada said:
After the councils of Carthage and Hippo you seem to think there was a consensus that agreed with the canon they put forth. What does “consensus” mean to you?
Click to expand...
Arguments among the Bishops stopped. St Jerome, who has questions about the deutercanonicals before, ended his objections afterward. The concencus remaind until Luther—more than a millenium later
 
CWBetts said:
Arguments among the Bishops stopped. St Jerome, who has questions about the deutercanonicals before, ended his objections afterward. The concencus remaind until Luther—more than a millenium later
Click to expand...
Not even close.

Go to www.newadvent.org and read the section on the canon of the OT.

Even the council fathers at Trent debated the canon so your above statement is patently false.
 
SemperReformada said:
Not even close.

Go to www.newadvent.org and read the section on the canon of the OT.

Even the council fathers at Trent debated the canon so your above statement is patently false.
Click to expand...
No. My statement was true. The only reason the canon had to be discussed at Trent was because of the heresies of the reformers
 
historyb said:
I’d rather trust them then the church of mary
Click to expand...
The Roman Catholic CHurch is the CHurch of Jesus Christ. We don not now, nor have we ever worshipped Mary. To make such a statement reveals that you are ignorant of the teachings of the Church. If we did worship Mary, as you claim, I would leave in a heartbeat. BUt that is neither here nor there. You come across an issue that you cannot give an intelligent response to, so it is time to lob a false accusation about CHurch doctrine. How very charitable of you. :rolleyes:
 
I am anything but ignorant I was in there for ten years and a Marian advocate. While you can sit there all pompous and dictate about the RCC the gulf between official dictate and practice is huge.

See you assume that anybody that attacks your scared cows doesn’t know what they are talking about, this shows vast ignorance on your part
 
historyb said:
I am anything but ignorant I was in there for ten years and a Marian advocate. While you can sit there all pompous and dictate about the RCC the gulf between official dictate and practice is huge.

See you assume that anybody that attacks your scared cows doesn’t know what they are talking about, this shows vast ignorance on your part
Click to expand...
If you left the CHurch is because you didn’t know what you were leaving
 
CWBetts said:
No. My statement was true. The only reason the canon had to be discussed at Trent was because of the heresies of the reformers
Click to expand...
No, your statment is completely false.

Read the article at newadvent and let me know what you think.

As for the Tridentine council fathers…some sided with Jerome, some didin’t but nonetheless there was a large undercurrent hostile to accepting the dc’s as canonical.

Heck, even the major scriptural commentary from the middle ages (glossa ordinaire) was negative to the dc’s canonocity.

Going back to the time of the earlier councils, the Vulgate was sent out complete with Jeromes prologues to the dc’s which clearly rejected the dc’s canonocity.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top