Why do Protestants accept the NT canon?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Randy_Carson
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
In general, how does this position differ substantially from: “I Trust in Him that I’ll decide correctly what I should believe”?

But specifically with regard to the NT canon: Have you ever questioned that the contents of your bible are anything other than “Scripture.”

How precisely did He convince you that these writings are an inerrant record of the Gospel message?

Chuck
TinaG said:
You trust Him.

Do you trust Him on your own? No. Faith is a gift from God. How do you know you believe? Well, you see that you do believe, and a minute ago you know you did not. What if you are wrong, and you believe falsely? Then you trust Him to make it right. There may be other "what if"s and the answer is always to trust Him. People fail you, but God does not. What if something happens that make it looks like He failed you? You still trust him. Is life hard? Trust him. Put those faith muscles to work. Trust Him. Pray for more faith. Talk to other believers. Read the Bible back to God. I ask God to show me what to do. Sometimes I get a logical answer. Sometimes I think He does not answer and things go wrong so I will trust Him. Sometimes I find out later He answered but it was in an entirely different way than I expected.

I cannot perceive reality on my own very well. I can be misled and deceived by others smarter and bigger than I am. I am one small weak girl in a big bad world. Without God there is no hope and no future except to be someone’s lunch or trophy. He is my defender, shield, ally, hope, future, riches, against which nothing compares. All is mirage and shadow in comparison. He alone is worthy of my trust.

God gave me faith. It was supernatural and I can’t really explain it. All I can do is mutter like this incoherently.

-Tina “Barely a Candle in the Darkness” G
Click to expand...
 
PRmerger said:
The Catholic Church is not Roman. There are 23 different rites, of which the Latin (or Roman) rite is only one.

As for this early church which kept and held as authoritative the Gospels, it was a church that had bishops and a pope, celebrated the Liturgy in the Eucharist, prayed for the dead, venerated Mary…

To demonstrate that the Bible alone is not sufficient. All Christians submit to the authority of the Catholic Church each and every time they quote Scripture, whether they acknowledge it or not. Willingly or unwittingly.
Click to expand...
You just described characteristics of the post Apostolic church. But but because that is not the topic of the thread lets get into that in another setting, and we do not submit to the authority of the Catholic Church in this matter.
This is what the Catholic Church teaches. it is different from what you are saying in my estimation.
These books the Church holds to be sacred and canonical not because she subsequently approved them
Click to expand...
 
Rightlydivide said:
You just described characteristics of the post Apostolic church.
Click to expand...
Yes!
But but because that is not the topic of the thread lets get into that in another setting,
Click to expand...
Fair enough.
and we do not submit to the authority of the Catholic Church.
Click to expand...
That’s what we’re saying–you *say *you don’t submit to the authority of the CC, but each and every time you quote Scripture, you are tacitly giving approval to the authority of the CC. 🤷
 
PRmerger said:
Yes!

Fair enough.

That’s what we’re saying–you *say *you don’t submit to the authority of the CC, but each and every time you quote Scripture, you are tacitly giving approval to the authority of the CC. 🤷
Click to expand...
No. Scripture is not scripture because of “authority”. The Catholic Church teaches that is subsequent ie after the fact.
 
Rightlydivide said:
No. Scripture is not scripture because of “authority”. The Catholic Church teaches that is subsequent ie after the fact.
Click to expand...
You are begging the question, then. Using circular reasoning.

“I know it’s Scripture because it’s inspired.”

“I know it’s inspired because it’s in Scripture.”

The honest, logical, historical and truthful answer to “I know it’s Scripture because _______” is this:
“because the CC told me”.
 
PRmerger said:
You are begging the question, then. Using circular reasoning.

“I know it’s Scripture because it’s inspired.”

“I know it’s inspired because it’s in Scripture.”

The honest, logical, historical and truthful answer to “I know it’s Scripture because _______” is this:
“because the CC told me”.
Click to expand...
It is not my logic in the quote. It is Catholic doctrine. Infallible Catholic doctrine.
 
PRmerger said:
You are begging the question, then. Using circular reasoning.

“I know it’s Scripture because it’s inspired.”

“I know it’s inspired because it’s in Scripture.”

The honest, logical, historical and truthful answer to “I know it’s Scripture because _______” is this:
“because the CC told me”.
Click to expand...
And again with the indication that people who disagree are not honest or truthful…
 
Are these Catholics forgetting that they believe in a three legged stool of Scripture, Tradition, and the Magisterium? They seem to be saying Scripture only has authority because of the other two legs. Is this correct Catholic teaching?

-Tina “Wondering” G
 
TinaG said:
Are these Catholics forgetting that they believe in a three legged stool of Scripture, Tradition, and the Magisterium? They seem to be saying Scripture only has authority because of the other two legs. Is this correct Catholic teaching?
Click to expand...
Actually I believe the question was how did “protestants” decide upon the contents of their one legged stool.

Chuck
 
I will always bring up official Catholic doctrine to make sure I am not arguing against an interpretation that does not match it.
 
clmowry said:
Actually I believe the question was how did “protestants” decide upon the contents of their one legged stool.

Chuck
Click to expand...
Well that is not exactly accurate [of fair]. The number of legs would change from denomination to denomination.

Some have a 3 legged stool of their own.

Nearly all have at least two legs.

It’s the rare bird that really professes that they believe what they believe through completely independent study of scripture.

My bad.

Chuck
 
These books the Church holds to be sacred and canonical not because she subsequently approved them by her authority after they had been composed by unaided human skill, nor simply because they contain revelation without error, but because, being written under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, they have God as their author, and were as such committed to the Church.
Click to expand...
 
clmowry said:
Well that is not exactly accurate [of fair]. The number of legs would change from denomination to denomination.

Some have a 3 legged stool of their own.

Nearly all have at least two legs.

It’s the rare bird that really professes that they believe what they believe through completely independent study of scripture.

My bad.

Chuck
Click to expand...
Not a problem.

-Tina “My Chair Has Wheels” G
 
The canon is not because of some subsequent authority. It is because God is the author of scripture and committed it to the church. What I have been saying all along although this is more succinct.
That is why I have been pointing out that in many cases Catholics are arguing against their own official doctrines.
 
TinaG said:
Are these Catholics forgetting that they believe in a three legged stool of Scripture, Tradition, and the Magisterium? They seem to be saying Scripture only has authority because of the other two legs. Is this correct Catholic teaching?

-Tina “Wondering” G
Click to expand...
No, we are not saying Scripture only has authority because of the other 2 legs, Tina.

We are saying that you only know what’s Scripture because the CC has told you so.

That is, how do you know which of these verses are inspired:

“All generations shall call me blessed!”

vs

“And seek assistance through patience and prayer, and most surely it is a hard thing except for the humble ones.”

There’s nothing objectively “inspired” about one of them vs the other. The only way you know that one is *theopneustos *and one is not, is because a decision was made for you in the 4th century by a group of Catholics, under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit.
 
PRmerger said:
No, we are not saying Scripture only has authority because of the other 2 legs, Tina.

We are saying that you only know what’s Scripture because the CC has told you so.

That is, how do you know which of these verses are inspired:

“All generations shall call me blessed!”

vs

“And seek assistance through patience and prayer, and most surely it is a hard thing except for the humble ones.”

There’s nothing objectively “inspired” about one of them vs the other. The only way you know that one is *theopneustos *and one is not, is because a decision was made for you in the 4th century by a group of Catholics, under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit.
Click to expand...
Actually, inspiration is an objective act apart from the Church deciding what is inspired. Apparently you believe Scripture is inspired only because the church says it is. God has been cut out of the equation.

-Tina “Probably Better not to Cut God out of Things” G
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top