C
- Status
T
Tomster
Guest
Open your eyes. We’ve been doing it all afternoon.
S
Scaun
Guest
Why should they not accept it?
P
PRmerger
Guest
They should NOT accept it, because to do so would be to accept the authority of the CC, which provided them with the NT canon.
R
Rightlydivide
Guest
You are telling Protestants to not accept the New Testament canon?
P
PRmerger
Guest
Of course not.
We’re simply showing that to accept the NT canon is to accept the authority (an infallible authority at that!) of the CC.
R
Rightlydivide
Guest
Thank the Lord. I misunderstood you then. SorryOf course not.
We’re simply showing that to accept the NT canon is to accept the authority (an infallible authority at that!) of the CC.
T
TinaG
Guest
Holy Logical Fallacy, Batman!Of course not.
We’re simply showing that to accept the NT canon is to accept the authority (an infallible authority at that!) of the CC.
If the sun came up in the east (which it more or less does, given the latitude and the season) and the Catholic Church said it did (which I am not sure has been enough of a controversy that a Council has been called on to Pronounce Upon the Matter), and I agreed with the observation, that does NOT mean that I agree with the idea of some infallible teaching of the Catholic Church. Some things are just tootin’ obvious.
-Tina “Not the Boy Wonder” G
B
byfaithalone
Guest
Scriptures predate the church.
B
byfaithalone
Guest
No. I have submitted that God used man to recognize what already was His God breathed word.
Absolutely not.
T
TinaG
Guest
Augh.
- Paul clearly states in Romans that he had not visited Rome before he wrote his letter to the Romans. There was a church there that predated his arrival. And there is no mention of Peter in the letter (here we go again
). - The Church did NOT start on Pentecost. The Church started with the old Testament believers, perhaps with Abel. There has been a community of faith on the earth for a LONG time. This is an indication of the poor teaching among Catholics and their deficient understanding of the Church. Hi, Guanophore!
- You don’t need some official standing by to tell you it is God speaking. Why are you so insecure that you feel you need this? Did the Pope stand by the burning bush to tell Moses it was God speaking? Did the Pope stand on the Damascus Road to tell Paul it was Jesus who spoke to him? God speaks for Himself and backs up His own authority.
He can tell you He spoke. He is more interested in getting you to pay attention to Him than you are in the matter.
W
Windfish
Guest
I do not find the reasons in this thread at all convincing, especially since the same Holy Spirit that is, apparently, guiding them in accepting NT canon is leading others to totally contradictory things. It just isn’t rational and, yes, a little dishonest (I know this will peeve our Protestant contributors, but it is how I feel). If the books of the NT canon weren’t all bound up as they are today, and were disparate documents, would the HS lead you to the correct canon of these documents? I don’t think so. You have the benefit of an already established canon, and THAT is what you trust.
T
tester
Guest
I don’t see that logical jump either.We’re simply showing that to accept the NT canon is to accept the authority (an infallible authority at that!) of the CC.
God can use unbelieving leaders like Cyrus (Isaiah 45)
“For the sake of Jacob my servant, of Israel my chosen, I summon you by name and bestow on you a title of honor, though you do not acknowledge me………I will strengthen you, though you have not acknowledged me,”
Regarding Pharaoh: (Exodus 9:15)
But I have raised you up for this very purpose, that I might show you my power and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth.
Regarding Pilate (John 19)
Pilate said. “Don’t you realize I have power either to free you or to crucify you?”
Jesus answered, "You would have no power over me if it were not given to you from above
And bit of hyperbole about stones: (Luke 19)
Some of the Pharisees in the crowd said to Jesus, “Teacher, rebuke your disciples!”
“I tell you,” he replied, “if they keep quiet, the stones will cry out.”
The POINT is that God uses all types of people to accomplish his Sovereign Will; that does NOT mean those kingdoms, institutions, people (or stones !) are infallible!
**To the Catholic Church: thank you for being a humble servant of the Lord and compiling His Sacred Scripture. **
But do not pridefully claim that if were not for the Catholic Church there would be no Bible.
Do not pridefully claim that the authority Catholic Church validates the Bible.
Do not pridefully claim that the Sacred Scripture is a subset (a SUBset!!) of your Sacred Tradition.
Do not pridefully claim that the Bible is the book of the Catholic Church (vs. the Church of the Book)
Do not pridefully claim that because the early Church had been used by God to prepare an infallible table of contents that the Catholic Church is infallible.
God’s Will be done with or without the Catholic Church.
AMEN !
4
4thelamb
Guest
How would I recognize you as a sister, when you don’t honor and defend our Father?
Certainly a daughter does not hesitate to give her father full praise that’s due him, along with a humble obedience, in return for his endless outpouring of love, patience and continual instruction? And a sister in Christ surely would not lead her brother into sin against the Spirit of the Living God by accrediting to Men, that which has been accomplished by the Holy Spirit in the perfect purpose and plan of the Father?
But because of your lack of fear and respect for your Creator, failing to use every opportunity God has given you to humbly proclaim that He can do ALL things without so much as a finger lifted from man’s own free will, and your ultimate lack of faith in the Spirit as the full and complete author and guardian of Scripture, I’m not exactly sure what kind of a person I’m speaking to…
As to the 1 source you’ve cited. I hardly believe that reading one Catholic Website is going to provide you with a viable source of objective information. Consider it a personal challenge to you to find the proof for your claims outside of the Romanist’s teachings.
Since your knowledge of church history relies on one Catholic website alone, there’s probably gonna be some things I’m sure that will surprise you about the history of the church. For example: “At the beginning of the 3rd century, the term ‘priest’ is used for the first time of a Christian minister, and language reminiscent of the Temple cult was applied to presbyters, so that the Old Testament orders of high priests, priests, and Levites were being used as the model for Bishops, Presbyters, and Deacons.”—‘Oxford Dictionary of the Bible’
As for my citation on this subject: obviously it would be impossible to name every source that discusses these issues. However the Sources that I happen to have in my possesion currently include:
“Early Christians Speak”; Everett Ferguson; Copyright 1971 by the Sweet Publishing Company. Contained within are the writings of Hermas, Ignatius, Justin, Eranaeus, the epistles of the Apostles, Der Balyzeh Papyrus, Presbyters of Smyrna, Tertullian, and Hippolytus and other church fathers which are all also found in any public library within the contents of any one of the large number of texts discussing church history;
“History of Christianity”–Latourette Vol 1. Copyright 1953,1971 by Harper & Row Publishers Inc.
“Oxford Dictionary of The Bible” second edition; W.R.F. Browning;
www.wikepedia.com/earlychristianity
www.americancatholic.org—Here the roman catholic position on “the ordination of priests” is stated and the origens of such are discussed.
P
PRmerger
Guest
Huh?
That the sun rises in the east is clearly an observable phenomenon.
That the Gospel of Mark is theopneustos is not. It is only known to be inspired because of an infallible authority.
P
PRmerger
Guest
OT writings predate the Church, but, of course, no Christian can say with a straight face that the Bible existed before the Church.
And, one would not know what’s canonical in the OT were it not for the CC.
P
PRmerger
Guest
That’s very Catholic of byfaithalone to say that!
Well, it would have been intellectually honest of byfaithalone to acknowledge it…but even without his acknowledgment reason demands this conclusion: if one accepts that there is no error in the canon of Scripture, then it has been INFALLIBLY determined .
H
HCC
Guest
Yes, I have always wondered this myself. Why on Earth would Protestants want anything to do with a Bible put together by the authority of the the Catholic Church under direct guidance of the Holy Ghost? It makes no sense, they reject Catholic teaching, but they accept the scriptures from whence it is based? Never made sense to me.
C
clmowry
Guest
- Paul clearly states in Romans that he had not visited Rome before he wrote his letter to the Romans. There was a church there that predated his arrival. And there is no mention of Peter in the letter (here we go again ).
- The Church did NOT start on Pentecost. The Church started with the old Testament believers, perhaps with Abel.
There has been a community of faith on the earth for a LONG time. This is an indication of the poor teaching among Catholics and their deficient understanding of the Church. Hi, Guanophore!
So anybody with faith in God was part of the Christian Church for all time…hmmm…
So if this were true then this would mean, oh yeah, that the Church predated all scripture, old and new testament.
Cool.
- You don’t need some official standing by to tell you it is God speaking. Why are you so insecure that you feel you need this? Did the Pope stand by the burning bush to tell Moses it was God speaking? Did the Pope stand on the Damascus Road to tell Paul it was Jesus who spoke to him? God speaks for Himself and backs up His own authority.
He can tell you He spoke. He is more interested in getting you to pay attention to Him than you are in the matter.
Hmmm…good job not addressing the issue at hand an tossing out all kinds of silly rhetoric.
Chuck
P
PRmerger
Guest
:coffeeread:
Amen!
Yes.
Indeed.
Of course.
We are not stating that the CC is infallible because God used it.
YOU are stating that it’s infallible when you agree that it made no error in determining the canon of Scripture.
:tiphat:
The CC is not proud about being the servant of the Holy Spirit. Indeed, it is rather humble about this fact.
You misunderstand Catholic teaching.
We are not a people of the Book, like Muslims or Fundamentalist Christians.
We are a people of the Word. The Word Made Flesh.
The Bible is a Catholic book compiled by Catholics.
D
.
Tell us where the error occurred in the canon of Scripture, and how you know. Should it have excluded the Book of Revelation?
Without the CC you could not be saved. :sad_yes:
- Status