The new testament corrupted?

[justcoolforyou]

How do we know the list to the new testament is not just another catholic tradition? The reformers like martin didn't agree the new testament was all the word of God...So as protestant Christians how do you know the list is correct with out error; infallible extra apostolic list?

 

[Der Alte]

How do we know the list to the new testament is not just another catholic tradition? The reformers like martin didn't agree the new testament was all the word of God...So as protestant Christians how do you know the list is correct with out error; infallible extra apostolic list?

The canon of the New Testament was accepted ca. 393 AD. There was no "Catholic" church headed by a "Pope" in Rome until 1075 AD when Ferdinand bishop of Rome, took the name Gregory VII unilaterally usurped authority over the church by issuing 27 Dictatus Papae, Papal Dictates.

 

[Thursday]

How do we know the list to the new testament is not just another catholic tradition? The reformers like martin didn't agree the new testament was all the word of God...So as protestant Christians how do you know the list is correct with out error; infallible extra apostolic list?

All of Christianity is Catholic Tradition. Some reject Christian teaching, but Jesus only started one Church and he gave it his authority. That's the Catholic Church.

 

[Thursday]

The canon of the New Testament was accepted ca. 393 AD. There was no "Catholic" church hwaded by a "Pope" in Rome until 1075 AD when Ferdinand bishop of Rome, took the name Gregory VII unilaterally usurped authority over the church by issuing 27 Dictatus Papae, Papal Dictates.

Gibberish.

The Catholic Church started in 33AD and it continues today.

There is no break in the line of the succession of the apostles.

 

[justcoolforyou]

The canon of the New Testament was accepted ca. 393 AD. There was no "Catholic" church hwaded by a "Pope" in Rome until 1075 AD when Ferdinand bishop of Rome, took the name Gregory VII unilaterally usurped authority over the church by issuing 27 Dictatus Papae, Papal Dictates.

My post didn't say roman catholic, i was talking about the catholic tradition not the roman catholic church in particular. ..

 

[Der Alte]

Gibberish.
The Catholic Church started in 33AD and it continues today.
There is no break in the line of the succession of the apostles.

I'm sure that is what you have been taught by priests and teachers but that is not what history outside the RCC shows. Here are a few of the 27 Dictatus Papae, if all this authority existed since 33 AD there would have been no need for Gregory to issues dictates.

Gregory VII Dictatus Papae, The Dictates of the Pope

2. That the Roman pontiff alone can with right be called universal.
3. That he alone can depose or reinstate bishops.
…
8. That he alone may use the imperial insignia.
9. That of the pope alone all princes shall kiss the feet.
10. That his name alone shall be spoken in the churches.
11. That his is the only name in the world.
12. That it may be permitted to him to depose emperors.
13. That the Roman pontiff alone can with right be called universal.

Cal State Univ Northridge

http://www.csun.edu/~hcfll004/dict_pap.html

http://www.britannica.com/topic/Dictatus-papae

http://www.encyclopedia.com/article-1G2-3407703233/dictatus-papae.html

West Oregon
http://www.wou.edu/history/files/2015/08/Christopher-Perkins1.pdf

Encyclopedia Brittanica

Even more directly influential was Gregory’s centralization of the church. This initiative, clearly outlined in the Dictatus papae (“Dictates of the Pope”), a list of 27 short statements (included in his official letter collection), reflected his belief that the pope, as the successor of St. Peter, inherits a commission from Christ to rule over the church. Gregory also believed that the pope is sanctified by the merit of St. Peter and that Rome alone defines the true faith. Through canonical elections, Roman and local synods, the publication of canonical collections and polemical manifestos, his appointment of plenipotentiary legates (representatives with full power to negotiate), and his immediate control of diocesan bishops, Gregory spun a web in which every thread led to Rome. The scattered priests and distant bishops gradually became a distinct class, the clergy, with a law and a loyalty of their own. Although Gregory died a lonely exile, his principles of reform found reception all over Europe, and the new generation of bishops was Gregorian in sympathy and obedient in practice to papal commands in a way unknown to their predecessors.

http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/507284/Roman-Catholicism/257678/Gregorian-Reform#toc257679

​

 

[Der Alte]

My post didn't say roman catholic, i was talking about the catholic tradition not the roman catholic church in particular. ..

The word "catholic" is from the Greek words κατά ὅλος/ "kata holos" = "according to the whole," or universal. In that sense the church universal has existed since 33 AD.

 

[Thursday]

The word "catholic" is from the Greek words κατά ὅλος/ "kata holos" = "according to the whole," or universal. In that sense the church universal has existed since 33 AD.

Exactly. It was the ONE Church. Jesus only started one Church.

St. Ignatius, a disciple of John, mentions it here in 107 AD:

“You must all follow the bishop as Jesus Christ follows the Father, and the presbytery as you would the apostles. Reverence the deacons as you would the command of God. Let no one do anything of concern to the Church without the bishop. Let that be considered a valid Eucharist which is celebrated by the bishop, or by one whom he appoints. Wherever the bishop appears, let the people be there; just as wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church.” (St. Ignatius of Antioch, Bishop and Martyr; Letter to the Smyrneans § 8)

 

[justcoolforyou]

The word "catholic" is from the Greek words κατά ὅλος/ "kata holos" = "according to the whole," or universal. In that sense the church universal has existed since 33 AD.

So how do you know the "Catholic Church " has given you an infallible new testament list? Martin believe the bible was corrupted in the old testament and new testament letters .. like hebrews, james and Revelation. ..

 

[justcoolforyou]

I'm sure that is what you have been taught by priests and teachers but that is not what history outside the RCC shows. Here are a few of the 27 Dictatus Papae, if all this authority existed since 33 AD there would have been no need for Gregory to issues dictates.

Gregory VII Dictatus Papae, The Dictates of the Pope

2. That the Roman pontiff alone can with right be called universal.
3. That he alone can depose or reinstate bishops.
…
8. That he alone may use the imperial insignia.
9. That of the pope alone all princes shall kiss the feet.
10. That his name alone shall be spoken in the churches.
11. That his is the only name in the world.
12. That it may be permitted to him to depose emperors.
13. That the Roman pontiff alone can with right be called universal.

Cal State Univ Northridge

http://www.csun.edu/~hcfll004/dict_pap.html

http://www.britannica.com/topic/Dictatus-papae

http://www.encyclopedia.com/article-1G2-3407703233/dictatus-papae.html

West Oregon
http://www.wou.edu/history/files/2015/08/Christopher-Perkins1.pdf

Encyclopedia Brittanica

Even more directly influential was Gregory’s centralization of the church. This initiative, clearly outlined in the Dictatus papae (“Dictates of the Pope”), a list of 27 short statements (included in his official letter collection), reflected his belief that the pope, as the successor of St. Peter, inherits a commission from Christ to rule over the church. Gregory also believed that the pope is sanctified by the merit of St. Peter and that Rome alone defines the true faith. Through canonical elections, Roman and local synods, the publication of canonical collections and polemical manifestos, his appointment of plenipotentiary legates (representatives with full power to negotiate), and his immediate control of diocesan bishops, Gregory spun a web in which every thread led to Rome. The scattered priests and distant bishops gradually became a distinct class, the clergy, with a law and a loyalty of their own. Although Gregory died a lonely exile, his principles of reform found reception all over Europe, and the new generation of bishops was Gregorian in sympathy and obedient in practice to papal commands in a way unknown to their predecessors.

http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/507284/Roman-Catholicism/257678/Gregorian-Reform#toc257679

​

So how do you know you have an infallible new testament list since the list itself is extra biblical extra apostolic. ..?

 

[Wgw]

So how do you know the "Catholic Church " has given you an infallible new testament list? Martin believe the bible was corrupted in the old testament and new testament letters .. like hebrews, james and Revelation. ..

Because, aside from the Roman Catholic Church, the other ancient apostolic churches, those being the Eastern Orthodox (Russians, Greeks, Antiochians, Romanians, Bulgarians, Georgians, Serbians, et cetera), the Oriental Orthodox (Armenians, Syriacs, Copts, Ethiopians, Indians), and the Assyrian Church of the East all agree on the canonicity of the 27 book Athanasian canon.

Some of the books Martin Luther sought to exclude are not used liturgically by all of these churches (the EOs don't read Revelations, the Syriacs and Assyrians use liturgically only a subset of books). However, they all recognize the validity of the 27 book Athanasian canon.

This canon was first enumerated by Athanasius (my avatar is an icon of him); Athanasius was vital in defending the doctrine of the Trinity against Arius and the Arians. So no Trinitarian Christian frankly has any valid reason to object to the canon, something most Lutheran theologians have accepted (Martin Luther's idea of "antilegomenna" was never very popular, even among Lutherans).

So how do you know you have an infallible new testament list since the list itself is extra biblical extra apostolic. ..?

Well, this is a valid argument against sola scriptura or nuda scriptura, in that the NT lacks a table of contents; the canon is a fourth century development. That said, there are good reasons for doubting the antiquity and apostolic authenticity of the various writings rejected by the canon, for example, the Gnostic apocrypha.

 

[Neochristian]

We are to decide that for ourselves.

 

[civilwarbuff]

We are to decide that for ourselves.

Could you clarify what we are to decide for ourselves?

 

[Neochristian]

Could you clarify what we are to decide for ourselves?

Which books are the inspired word of God and which books are not.

 

[civilwarbuff]

Which books are the inspired word of God and which books are not.

I take it you have an issue with certain NT books as being inspired?

 

[Neochristian]

I take it you have an issue with certain NT books as being inspired?

Not at all. I was just answering the original question I think. I do, however, consider many non-canonical books to be inspired.

 

[civilwarbuff]

Not at all. I was just answering the original question I think. I do, however, consider many non-canonical books to be inspired.

Care to expand on that?

 

[Neochristian]

Care to expand on that?

Yeah. I'd've included in the canon: Thomas, Infancy Thomas, Wisdom of Solomon, Wisdom of Jesus, Mary and Secret Matthew.

 

[civilwarbuff]

Yeah. I'd've included in the canon: Thomas, Infancy Thomas, Wisdom of Solomon, Wisdom of Jesus, Mary and Secret Matthew.

I know those are not recognized by protestants....who does accept those as canon?

 

[Neochristian]

I know those are not recognized by protestants....who does accept those as canon?

I don't think any denomination does. I do tho.