Why do Protestants accept the NT canon?

[clmowry]

Consider Irenaeus

The oldest clear endorsement of Mark, Matthew, Luke, and John being the only legitimate gospels was written c. 180 AD. was a claim made by Bishop Irenaeus in his polemic “Against the Heresies,”

**Questions: **
How did Irenaeus know those writings were Scripture?
**What Catholic Church degree or council had decided that by 180AD? **

What do you suppose would require the Catholic Church to issue a list of which books constitute authentic Scripture?

Why would you presume that the Church would need to have issued a list prior to 180AD?

Chuck

 

[tester]

What do you suppose would require the Catholic Church to issue a list of which books constitute authentic Scripture?

Why would you presume that the Church would need to have issued a list prior to 180AD?

Chuck

i thought it was clear that my post was in response to

Originally Posted by PRmerger
The honest, logical, historical and truthful answer to “I know it’s Scripture because _______” is this:
“because the CC told me”.

 

[PRmerger]

Have you looked for catechisms? Have you heard of Luther’s Small Catechism? We have a reformed catechism. I think other bodies have catechisms as well…And confessions of faith. And I suspect you are just spouting opinions you have picked up from other CA posters without basis in fact. Have you done research on this?

-Tina “I have a copy of the Westminster Confession of Faith if You Wanna Borrow It” G

I stand corrected. I am not familiar with Luther’s Small Catechism.

As for confessions of faith…um…ok. 30 paragraphs or so of reductionist theology that my primary school children learn. God is love. God made the world. Jesus died for my sins.

 

[PRmerger]

Originally Posted by PRmerger View Post
Paul clearly calls for married clergy as a norm.

How peculiar. Those posts attributed to me were not written by me but by TinaG.

 

[clmowry]

i thought it was clear that my post was in response to

Originally Posted by PRmerger
The honest, logical, historical and truthful answer to “I know it’s Scripture because _______” is this:
“because the CC told me”.

You were saying you belive scripture is scripture “because Irenaues quoted some of it?”

Chuck

 

[PRmerger]

Consider Irenaeus

The oldest clear endorsement of Mark, Matthew, Luke, and John being the only legitimate gospels was written c. 180 AD. was a claim made by Bishop Irenaeus in his polemic “Against the Heresies,”

**Questions:
How did Irenaeus know those writings were Scripture?
What Catholic Church degree or council had decided that by 180AD? **

Before the canon of Scripture was closed in the 4th century there were over 400 Christian texts which were scrutinized and considered. That Irenaeus was correct, before an infallible pronouncement was proclaimed, reflects that he had not departed from Apostolic Tradition.

 

[PRmerger]

You are acknowledging the authority of the Catholic Church which recognized that these 27 books were inspired on behalf of the world while rejecting others that had equally good (or greater) reasons for including them in the canon.

The Catholic Church rejected some books that many true Christians wanted to include.

The Catholic Church accepted some books that many true Christians doubted. (3 John and Philemon don’t even mention the name of Jesus…what led you personally to accept them as inspired Scripture?)

Whether you admit it or not, you accept the judgment of the Catholic Church on this matter just as all those of your faith tradition who came before you did, as well.

'zactly.

One simply cannot look at verses and decide what’s theopneustos and what’s not. We need the CC to do that for us.

Thus, how would anyone know whether each of these verses below are inspired or from man? Can we tell which is from Scripture and which is not,objectively, just by reading them?

Which ones are in the Bible and which ones aren’t–and is there anything in them that tells you, a Believer, what’s inspired and what’s not?

* All generations shall call me blessed!

* O you who believe! Remember God's favor to you when there came against you forces, so We sent against them a strong wind and forces which you did not see, and God is Ever- Seeing what you do.

* My breath is offensive to my wife.

* For from the rising of the sun to its setting my name will be great among the nations, and in every place incense will be offered to my name, and a pure offering. For my name will be great among the nations, says the LORD of hosts.

* Moreover, what I have now said in regard to abstaining from wanton looks should be carefully observed, with due love for the persons and hatred of the sin, in observing, forbidding, reporting, reproving, and punishing of all other fault.

* Be appalled at this, O heavens, and shudder with great horror," declares the LORD.

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

• Saul went into a cave to relieve himself.

OR~

Do we have to rely on the CC to tell us which of those sayings are inspired and what’s not?

Because, clearly, there’s nothing in the essence of any of those texts which tells us something is inspired and what’s not!!

 

[Rightlydivide]

Wow.

If the celebration of the Eucharist, veneration of Mary (and the saints) and other distinctively “Catholic” doctrines are actually “characteristics of the post Apostolic church”, then I have to ask: Why are you not following the earliest believers in these practices?

Because they were not the practices of the Apostles as found in scripture and the earliest Christian documents. I can and have traced every existing record of every doctrine I do not believe to find when it was first mentioned and then practiced.

 

[PRmerger]

Because they were not the practices of the Apostles as found in scripture and the earliest Christian documents. I can and have traced every existing record of every doctrine I do not believe to find when it was first mentioned and then practiced.

Really. You do this for “every doctrine”? Catholic only or your own church’s too?

Like the altar call? Have you traced every existing record of this ritual and when it first began?

 

[tester]

You were saying you belive scripture is scripture “because Irenaues quoted some of it?”

Chuck

nope: that’s not what I’m doing ; I’ll try to clear it up .

What I am doing is disputing the claim made by PRmerger (and others) that we only know what is scripture “because the CC told me”.

I then presented two examples ; first one in post 118 with Polycarp calling the Book of Ephesians scripture and then in post 119 with Irenaues delcaring Matthew , Mark, Luke, and John as the only Gospels.

So then, in direct response to the claim “because the CC told me” I have shown two solid examples of where the early Christian church leaders knew what scripture was PRIOR to being told by the CC. Of course are other examples.

Therefore the claim “that we only know what is scripture because the CC told me”.
is false.

 

[PRmerger]

Therefore the claim “that we only know what is scripture because the CC told me”.
is false.

Then please tell us how *you *know what Scripture is, without begging the question.

 

[neophyte]

If you are Protestant, why do you accept the 27 books of the New Testament as being canonical?

Specifically, how did you personally conclude that each of the NT books contained in your Bible are the inspired Word of God and that there are no others that should be included?

Thanks.

I’m not a Protestnt anymore, but when I was I accepted the NT canon because I was taught to do so.

In other words, I accepted it because it was tradition that was handed on to me.

 

[Rightlydivide]

Really. You do this for “every doctrine”? Catholic only or your own church’s too?

Like the altar call? Have you traced every existing record of this ritual and when it first began?

The term is not one we use. Perhaps you are thinking of the Baptists?

 

[PRmerger]

The term is not one we use. Perhaps you are thinking of the Baptists?

As there are over 30,000 different Christian denominations it is indeed difficult for Catholics to determine exactly what rituals your particular pastor has decided is biblical.

But, to the point, you’ve read every single doctrine, (Catholic only? or yours as well) and traced it back to its origins?

I can and have traced every existing record of every doctrine I do not believe to find when it was first mentioned and then practiced.

 

[Rightlydivide]

As there are over 30,000 different Christian denominations it is indeed difficult for Catholics to determine exactly what rituals your particular pastor has decided is biblical.

But, to the point, you’ve read every single doctrine, (Catholic only? or yours as well) and traced it back to its origins?

Leadership is plural, that is both the New Testament pattern as well as the pattern of the early church. I would reference an article on early church polity from a source like the Catholic Encyclopedia

•In each Community the authority may originally have belonged to college or presbyter-bishops

I do not think my comment is the point of this thread and I do need to remain on topic. I have not read every single doctrine just the ones I know about in which we disagree to evaluate other people’s contention. For example, those areas we agree (and almost all who call themselves Christian) would not merit as much study.

 

[clmowry]

I have shown two solid examples of where the early Christian church leaders knew what scripture was PRIOR to being told by the CC.

In order to substantiate your claim, you would need to demonstrate that these “early Christian church leaders” somehow learned what they knew about “scripture” by a means other than passing on what they learned from the Catholic Church which they led.

No?

Chuck

 

[tester]

In the context of this thread;

The cause is God, the effect in the Canon of Scripture:

The “tool” God used was the Catholic Church.

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,”

God can also use believers (many examples). And note that the believers did not take the credit or Glory for doing God’s work.

And THAT is the point.

If Catholics claimed that the God used the CC to formalize the canon of Scripture , very few Protestants would have an issue with that.

But the attitude of “We would not have the Bible is weren’t for the CC” diminishes the sovereignty of God.

I can’t ever find an example of Paul taking any credit for the doing the work Christ, and neither should the CC… ALL honor and glory to Christ alone!!

 

[PRmerger]

In the context of this thread;

The cause is God, the effect in the Canon of Scripture:

Yes! That’s very Catholic of you to say that, tester!

The “tool” God used was the Catholic Church.

:extrahappy::bounce:

Yes, that’s all we’re saying. Nothing more, and nothing less.

If Catholics claimed that the God used the CC to formalize the canon of Scripture , very few Protestants would have an issue with that.

That is absolutely false. Just from reading this thread you can see how difficult it is to get Protestants to acknowledge this simple fact.

But the attitude of “We would not have the Bible is weren’t for the CC” diminishes the sovereignty of God.

How so? It is only through the guidance of the Holy Spirit, a fact clearly acknowledged by the CC, that this Catholic Church provided you and me with the Scriptures.

I can’t ever find an example of Paul taking any credit for the doing the work Christ, and neither should the CC… ALL honor and glory to Christ alone!!

Yet you don’t have a problem with saying that Moses parted the Red Sea? Or calling the first books in the OT the Books of Moses? Or describing the Law of Moses?

What we attribute to certain individuals who follow God’s will is not a denigration of God’s sovereignty.

 

[PRmerger]

I have not read every single doctrine just the ones I know about in which we disagree to evaluate other people’s contention.

Ok. Thanks for clearing that up.

Because they were not the practices of the Apostles as found in scripture and the earliest Christian documents. I can and have traced every existing record of every doctrine I do not believe to find when it was first mentioned and then practiced.

Every existing record?

 

[tester]

In order to substantiate your claim, you would need to demonstrate that these “early Christian church leaders” somehow learned what they knew about “scripture” by a means other than passing on what they learned from the Catholic Church which they led.

No?

Chuck

so if St John the Apostle told Polycarp that Ephesians was scared scripture: would your answer would be that St. John was a Catholic ?

Does being a Catholic equal the Catholic Church?