Where and when was established the canon of Scriptures that protestants believe? (SPLIT)

[PRmerger]

The NT office of “elder” & “bishop” are the same, not “priest” & "elder.

Does your church have bishops, as the NT church did?

 

[FathersKnowBest]

Originally Posted by FathersKnowBest
Wrong.

At the risk of repeating myself:

It does? Can you quote the text?

What you are doing by providing that quote is called “quote-mining” Scripture out of context, rather than exegetically examining the surrounding passages & other relevant verses to find out what Paul is actually saying.

Please demonstrate how this is out of context.

No one is moving goal posts. I was addressing your comment about if you wrote an errorless piece of writings, would that qualify as being God-breathed. You are under the false impression that I believe inerrancy is the “only” godly criterion to qualify a piece of writing as Inspired - which I’ve never even given that impression. Apostolic authorship (or a contemporary) is also.

For many books in the NT, you have only the word of the Church that they have Apostolic authority.

For instance, how do you know that Hebrews has Apostolic authority?

The NT office of “elder” & “bishop” are the same, not “priest” & "elder.

I don’t think you have a firm grasp about what the Church teaches about the ministerial priesthood.

The one priesthood of Christ

1544 Everything that the priesthood of the Old Covenant prefigured finds its fulfillment in Christ Jesus, the "one mediator between God and men."15 The Christian tradition considers Melchizedek, “priest of God Most High,” as a prefiguration of the priesthood of Christ, the unique “high priest after the order of Melchizedek”;16 "holy, blameless, unstained,"17 "by a single offering he has perfected for all time those who are sanctified,"18 that is, by the unique sacrifice of the cross.

1545 The redemptive sacrifice of Christ is unique, accomplished once for all; yet it is made present in the Eucharistic sacrifice of the Church. The same is true of the one priesthood of Christ; it is made present through the ministerial priesthood without diminishing the uniqueness of Christ’s priesthood: "Only Christ is the true priest, the others being only his ministers."19

Two participations in the one priesthood of Christ

1546 Christ, high priest and unique mediator, has made of the Church "a kingdom, priests for his God and Father."20 The whole community of believers is, as such, priestly. The faithful exercise their baptismal priesthood through their participation, each according to his own vocation, in Christ’s mission as priest, prophet, and king. Through the sacraments of Baptism and Confirmation the faithful are "consecrated to be . . . a holy priesthood."21

1547 The ministerial or hierarchical priesthood of bishops and priests, and the common priesthood of all the faithful participate, “each in its own proper way, in the one priesthood of Christ.” While being “ordered one to another,” they differ essentially.22 In what sense? While the common priesthood of the faithful is exercised by the unfolding of baptismal grace --a life of faith, hope, and charity, a life according to the Spirit–, the ministerial priesthood is at the service of the common priesthood. It is directed at the unfolding of the baptismal grace of all Christians. The ministerial priesthood is a means by which Christ unceasingly builds up and leads his Church. For this reason it is transmitted by its own sacrament, the sacrament of Holy Orders.

In the person of Christ the Head . . .

1548 In the ecclesial service of the ordained minister, it is Christ himself who is present to his Church as Head of his Body, Shepherd of his flock, high priest of the redemptive sacrifice, Teacher of Truth. This is what the Church means by saying that the priest, by virtue of the sacrament of Holy Orders, acts in persona Christi Capitis:23

It is the same priest, Christ Jesus, whose sacred person his minister truly represents. Now the minister, by reason of the sacerdotal consecration which he has received, is truly made like to the high priest and possesses the authority to act in the power and place of the person of Christ himself (virtute ac persona ipsius Christi).24
Christ is the source of all priesthood: the priest of the old law was a figure of Christ, and the priest of the new law acts in the person of Christ.25

1549 Through the ordained ministry, especially that of bishops and priests, the presence of Christ as head of the Church is made visible in the midst of the community of believers.26 In the beautiful expression of St. Ignatius of Antioch, the bishop is typos tou Patros: he is like the living image of God the Father.27

1550 This presence of Christ in the minister is not to be understood as if the latter were preserved from all human weaknesses, the spirit of domination, error, even sin. The power of the Holy Spirit does not guarantee all acts of ministers in the same way. While this guarantee extends to the sacraments, so that even the minister’s sin cannot impede the fruit of grace, in many other acts the minister leaves human traces that are not always signs of fidelity to the Gospel and consequently can harm the apostolic fruitfulness of the Church.

 

[Porknpie]

AND they were read during the liturgy in the early church.

And that liturgy that you refer to was the Catholic Mass.

Justin Martyr describes the early Catholic liturgy in the 2nd century (From the First Apology of St. Justin Martyr, c. 155 AD)

*On Sunday we have a common assembly of all our members, whether they live in the city or the outlying districts. The recollections of the apostles or the writings of the prophets are read, as long as there is time. When the reader has finished, the president of the assembly speaks to us; he urges everyone to imitate the examples of virtue we have heard in the readings. Then we all stand up together and pray.

On the conclusion of our prayer, bread and wine and water are brought forward. The president offers prayers and gives thanks to the best of his ability, and the people give assent by saying, “Amen”. The eucharist is distributed, everyone present communicates, and the deacons take it to those who are absent.

The wealthy, if they wish, may make a contribution, and they themselves decide the amount. The collection is placed in the custody of the president, who uses it to help the orphans and widows and all who for any reason are in distress, whether because they are sick, in prison, or away from home. In a word, he takes care of all who are in need.*

He adds that they have been “taught” that the bread and wine becomes the body and blood of Christ.

We do not consume the eucharistic bread and wine as if it were ordinary food and drink, for we have been taught that as Jesus Christ our Savior became a man of flesh and blood by the power of the Word of God, so also the food that our flesh and blood assimilates for its nourishment becomes the flesh and blood of the incarnate Jesus by the power of his own words contained in the prayer of thanksgiving.

Of course the regenerative waters of baptism are necessary prior to receiving the Lord.

No one may share the Eucharist with us unless he believes that what we teach is true, unless he is washed in the regenerating waters of baptism for the remission of his sins, and unless he lives in accordance with the principles given us by Christ.

 

[Isaiah45_9]

And that liturgy that you refer to was the Catholic Mass.

Also called Divine Liturgy in other Rites.

 

[yankeeredneck]

It is my understanding, and I could be wrong, but I believe the Jews had a “council” of sorts around 100 AD, and decided to ditch the seven Deuterocanonical Books. because there were no surviving original Hebrew versions, just the Greek (and perhaps others). So if Protestants are rejecting them on that basis, shouldn’t they reject the entire New Testament as well?

When I was protestant, I heard a couple theories.

1. it came from the early church councils. (My world blew up a bit when I was told this and read the councils to discover their list to be different)
2. from the Jewish people (no explanation of when or how or why other than perhaps the reformers.
3. each individual decides for themselves and comes up with the same 66 books because it’s sooooooo obvious they are scripture (this last one I can’t understand how anyone holds it)

So I will eat my popcorn and observe!