What if the bible did not exist?

  • Thread starter Thread starter rinnie
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Doesn’t really matter. We cant change the past so the question is for naught.
 
Maybe the question should be would Christianity be different if the Canon of scripture included different books?

Actually though when was it that people had greater access to the Bible… in history.

It seems the church had formed or was already built around certain rites before the Bible came to be widely known among the masses of people.

I’ve also wondered what if the Gospels were in Syriac or based on Aramaic rather than Koine Greek?
 
SalusaSecondus said:
The spirit of God works through our iniquities no matter how great.
Click to expand...
Agreed but it does not explain nor answer my question. How does the church in a disastrous state recognize what the canon should be? I would like to understand how this could possibly work. I can understand one or the other but not both.

Peace!!!
 
rinnie said:
Do you think if the bible did not exist, then the only Church would be the Catholic Church today, as when the bible did not exist??
Click to expand...
There is no way that the events of the NT - the Word Made Flesh - could have happened with the written word being as it is, and was, as an already-devised form of communication. (Though many would have learnt their heritage through remembrance as also through verbal repetition).

Did the Jews, for example, become a different religion after Abraham to NT times? No! They guarded their belief zealously and jealously.

I guess we have to ask ourselves: if our Creator had worked things another way through Creation then would it work out His way? You know the answer.
 
adf417 said:
If the church was in such a disastrous state can you explain how this recognition could occur?🤷

Peace!!!
Click to expand...
By prayer and Holy Spirit-filled witness by a number of more insightful individuals at Councils, whose discernment was accepted. Hence understanding the content of the faith that matches Holy Scripture came before exactly delimiting it.
 
adf417 said:
Agreed but it does not explain nor answer my question. How does the church in a disastrous state recognize what the canon should be? I would like to understand how this could possibly work. I can understand one or the other but not both.

Peace!!!
Click to expand...
The Holy Spirit works through people in spite of their disastrous state. Even the mightiest of sinners do recognize truth from time to time. The church is the same way.
 
SalusaSecondus said:
The Holy Spirit works through people in spite of their disastrous state. Even the mightiest of sinners do recognize truth from time to time. The church is the same way.
Click to expand...
Agreed but how do you know the church, in the disastrous state as you profess, “recognized” the correct NT? If the church was as disastrous as you describe maybe its recognition is wrong also.

Peace!!!
 
friardchips said:
There is no way that the events of the NT - the Word Made Flesh - could have happened with the written word being as it is, and was, as an already-devised form of communication. (Though many would have learnt their heritage through remembrance as also through verbal repetition).
Click to expand...
Typo: ‘…could NOT have happened’…😃
 
kimg901 said:
Doesn’t really matter. We cant change the past so the question is for naught.
Click to expand...
Can we not change the past from learning from it? If we embrace all the good and then put all that good we learned into practice, then the past becomes a Bounty for the Future.

Yes the past will always be lost if we do not learn from the mistakes made and continue to make the mistakes of the past.

I like the question posted by Arthra above - What if the Canon did include other excluded books, what difference would have that made?

I also wonder what would have been if no Official Interpretation was put on any Scripture.

Regards Tony
 
adf417 said:
Agreed but how do you know the church, in the disastrous state as you profess, “recognized” the correct NT? If the church was as disastrous as you describe maybe its recognition is wrong also.

Peace!!!
Click to expand...
I don’t. I don’t believe the table of contents is theopnuestros. I am willing to go with the consensus of the church on the issue though.
 
In Buddhism, monks would chant the scriptures over and over again to preserve them orally. They passed this tradition on to new monks, who would chant the scriptures over and over again and so on. It was over four hundred years after the death of the Buddha that the oral scripture was finally put to paper.
 
SalusaSecondus said:
If the bible didn’t exist then it would be necessary for God to create it.
Click to expand...
SalusaSecondus said:
Not really. The church was in a disastrous state prior to the NT being compiled. The church recognized that God gave us the bible because of the confusion that was wracking the church. If the bible didn’t exist the church would be in the same disastrous state that it was many centuries ago.
Click to expand...
SalusaSecondus said:
I don’t. I don’t believe the table of contents is theopnuestros. I am willing to go with the consensus of the church on the issue though.
Click to expand...
🤷 maybe the church is currently in the same disastrous state that it was many centuries ago. As you say, “you don’t know”.

Peace!!!
 
adf417 said:
🤷 maybe the church is currently in the same disastrous state that it was many centuries ago. As you say, “you don’t know”.

Peace!!!
Click to expand...
Not at all. We are in a much better state today both politically and theologically.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top