• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

  • CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.
  • We hope the site problems here are now solved, however, if you still have any issues, please start a ticket in Contact Us

  • The rule regarding AI content has been updated. The rule now rules as follows:

    Be sure to credit AI when copying and pasting AI sources. Link to the site of the AI search, just like linking to an article.

All of these different doctrines, Why?

Bro.T

Bible Christian
Site Supporter
Aug 17, 2008
3,004
351
U.S.
✟362,506.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
The Sabbath Day: and the LORD spake unto Moses, saying "Speak thou also unto the children of Israel, saying, verily my Sabbaths ye shall keep: for it is a sign between me and you throughout your generations; that ye may know that I am the LORD that doth sanctify you.”Ye shall keep the Sabbath therefore; for it is holy unto you: every one that defileth it shall surely be put to death: for whosoever doeth any work therein, that soul shall be cut off from among his people. Six days may work be done; but in the seventh is the Sabbath of rest, holy to the LORD: whosoever doeth any work in the Sabbath day, he shall surely be put to death. Wherefore the children of Israel shall keep the Sabbath, to observe the Sabbath throughout their generations, for a perpetual covenant. It is a sign between me and the children of Israel forever: for in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, and on the seventh day he rested, and was refreshed.” (Exodus 31:12-17)

Let’s take a look and see what Jesus did when he came in the flesh, And Jesus returned in the power of the Spirit into Galilee: and there went out a fame of him through all the region round about. And he taught in their synagogues, being glorified of all. And he came to Nazareth, where he had been brought up: and, as his custom was, he went into the synagogue on the sabbath day, and stood up for to read. (Luke 4:14-16)
 
Upvote 0

timewerx

the village i--o--t--
Aug 31, 2012
17,226
6,474
✟402,606.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian Seeker
Marital Status
Single
2 Peter 3:16
as also in all his letters, speaking in them of these things, in which there are some things that are hard to understand, which the untaught and unstable distort, as they do also the rest of the Scriptures, to their own destruction.

Many Christians see this verse proving Paul's writings as scriptures.

However, the interpretation is problematic - what about the synoptic gospels what were written / added to the NT at a later date, some centuries later than Paul's writings?

No one told they were scriptures. Peter certainly was not referring to the Synoptic Gospels as the "other scriptures" because they weren't written yet in their time and I doubt that Peter is expecting a "bible" to come out centuries later because Jesus taught them about the Holy Spirit guiding them to all truth and reminding of all things Jesus taught them, not a book nor scriptures (John 16:13, John 14:26).

But let's say Peter meant "other scriptures" can also include writings that eventually gets added to scriptures at a later date, this means we can add writings to the Bible deemed fitting the standard of Canon - not just stopping many centuries ago but continuing to the present day.

Yet we stopped adding writings to the Bible well over a thousand years ago.

This means that scriptures can't be just any good Christian writing added to the Torah (Old Testament). Jesus did not give instructions to make new scriptures of his teachings nor add His teachings to the Torah. He said way more than once, the Holy Spirit will fulfill the job of reminding us of His teachings as well as guiding us to all truth.

And the Holy Spirit is not a mute spirit only capable of pointing us where to look and can only guide us to search the Bible. If that's the case, it massively elevates the importance of the Bible. Jesus should have mentioned the Bible in His teachings and/or gave instructions to add His teachings to the Torah. Yet, there's none of those. Even His beloved disciple who wrote things down, Jesus did not tell him to make copies of his writings.
 
Upvote 0

Studyman

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Apr 18, 2020
2,897
792
67
Michigan
✟567,557.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
You absolutely right we do have a choice, but let's take a look at what it all comes down to in the end. Let's go to Ecclesiastes 12: 13 Let us hear the conclusion of the whole matter: Fear God, and keep his commandments: for this is the whole duty of man. 14 For God shall bring every work into judgment, with every secret thing, whether it be good, or whether it be evil.
Amen, what else matters than submitting to the wisdom of God.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bro.T
Upvote 0

fhansen

Oldbie
Sep 3, 2011
16,801
4,208
✟417,007.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
No, Catholics invented many things that are not sound doctrine
Even if true, those going by Scripture alone "invented" many unsound doctrines which they disagree with each other over-and then often proceed to debate each other on those differences right here on these forums.
 
Upvote 0

Bro.T

Bible Christian
Site Supporter
Aug 17, 2008
3,004
351
U.S.
✟362,506.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
The Dietary Law: Read the whole 11th chapter of Leviticus. I'll only put up a few verses. "And the LORD spake unto Moses and to Aaron, saying unto them, "Speak unto the children of Israel, saying, these are the beasts which ye shall eat among all the beasts that are on the earth." Whatsoever parteth the hoof, and is cloven-footed, and cheweth the cud, among the beasts, that shall ye eat. Nevertheless these shall ye not eat of them that chew the cud, or of them that divide the hoof: as the camel, because he cheweth the cud, but divideth not the hoof; he is unclean unto you. And the coney, because he cheweth the cud, but divideth not the hoof; he is unclean unto you. And the hare, because he cheweth the cud, but divideth not the hoof; he is unclean unto you. And the swine, though he divide the hoof, and be cloven-footed, yet he cheweth not the cud; he is unclean to you. Of their flesh shall ye not eat, and their carcase shall ye not touch; they are unclean to you.

These shall ye eat of all that are in the waters: whatsoever hath fins and scales in the waters, in the seas, and in the rivers, them shall ye eat. And all that have not fins and scales in the seas, and in the rivers, of all that move in the waters, and of any living thing which is in the waters, they shall be an abomination unto you: This is the law of the beasts, and of the fowl, and of every living creature that moveth in the waters, and of every creature that creepeth upon the earth: To make a difference between the unclean and the clean, and between the beast that may be eaten and the beast that may not be eaten.” (Leviticus 11:1-10, & 46-47)

The lord have not changed his ways. For I am the LORD, I change not; therefore ye sons of Jacob are not consumed (Malachi 3:6) or Hebrews 13:8 Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and to day, and for ever.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Studyman
Upvote 0

Lukaris

Orthodox Christian
Site Supporter
Aug 3, 2007
9,175
3,431
Pennsylvania, USA
✟1,041,234.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Single
There are different understandings among Christians in which different communities ( or denominations) in which salvation is preached. This, I believe, is important to realize but it need not confuse any Christian in their particular confession.

There are also some communities that have strayed from sound doctrine they once may have had. This is a very tricky situation in which discernment and understanding are critical.

I can only think of examples of what I mean and one example is John 3:16-21. Every Christian should agree what the Lord says is absolutely necessary for salvation. Differences in understanding of how absolute condemnation is in this. Some people believe in a blanket condemnation whereas some believe there are possibilities where God is merciful beyond our basic understanding ( John 3:20-21, Deuteronomy 29:29, Romans 9:14-18 etc.),

A good book to read on sound, basic Christian understanding is Mere Christianity by C.S. Lewis.



 
Upvote 0

fhansen

Oldbie
Sep 3, 2011
16,801
4,208
✟417,007.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Not to be too negative,.......but if everything was as perfect and truthful and joyous for everyone as you say,....... then all the Waldensians that had the scriptures in their own Romance language would have never been brutally murdered and forced to convert to Catholicism by edge of the sword or die. Wycliffe's body would have never been dug up and crushed and burned, and then the remains dumped in a river for putting the Latin scriptures into English. William Tyndale, John Rogers, Cromwell, and others would never have been burned at that stake for putting the scriptures into English. Folks would have been perfectly happy and not forced to leave their place of origin to another country to avoid being murdered by the church that supposedly was handed a perfect way of life for everyone to live by.

Religion really has a way of making people do some very bad things for some reason.

I'll take my chances at holding onto Jesus and trusting The Holy Spirit and His scriptures.
Well...I never hinted at it all being positive, let alone perfect and truthful and joyous. I only spoke of the consistency of teachings. Anyway, it's not religion that's the problem, but man, with or without religion. So whether or not he heeds his own message, whether or not he knows and practices what he preaches, is the real issue. Members/leaders of the church have both excelled supremely at doing so, and failed badly at other times and places.
 
Upvote 0

fhansen

Oldbie
Sep 3, 2011
16,801
4,208
✟417,007.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Jerome also stated that Judith, Tobit, and Maccabees were not scripture but that they could be read for edification.

“As, then, the Church reads Judith, Tobit, and the books of Maccabees, but does not admit them among the canonical Scriptures, so let it read these two volumes for the edification of the people, not to give authority to doctrines of the Church.” (Jerome, Prefaces to the Books of the Vulgate Version of the Old Testament, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, and the Song of Songs).

Athanasius was even more explicit as he explains which books belonged and the cannon and decried the apocrypha as not being scripture.

2 “But since we have made mention of heretics as dead, but of ourselves as possessing the Divine Scriptures for salvation; and since I fear lest, as Paul wrote to the Corinthians, some few of the simple should be beguiled from their simplicity and purity, by the subtility of certain men, and should henceforth read other books–those called apocryphal–led astray by the similarity of their names with the true books; I beseech you to bear patiently, if I also write, by way of remembrance, of matters with which you are acquainted, influenced by the need and advantage of the Church . . . 3. In proceeding to make mention of these things, I shall adopt, to commend my undertaking, the pattern of Luke the Evangelist, saying on my own account: ‘Forasmuch as some have taken in hand,’ to reduce into order for themselves the books termed apocryphal, and to mix them up with the divinely inspired Scripture, concerning which we have been fully persuaded, as they who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and ministers of the Word, delivered to the fathers; it seemed good to me also, having been urged thereto by true brethren, and having learned from the beginning, to set before you the books included in the Canon, and handed down, and accredited as Divine; to the end that any one who has fallen into error may condemn those who have led him astray; and that he who has continued stedfast in purity may again rejoice, having these things brought to his remembrance . . . 4 There are, then, of the Old Testament, twenty-two books in number; for, as I have heard, it is handed down that this is the number of the letters among the Hebrews; their respective order and names being as follows. The first is Genesis, then Exodus, next Leviticus, after that Numbers, and then Deuteronomy. Following these there is Joshua, the son of Nun, then Judges, then Ruth. And again, after these four books of Kings, the first and second being reckoned as one book, and so likewise the third and fourth as one book. And again, the first and second of the Chronicles are reckoned as one book. Again Ezra, the first and second(4a) are similarly one book. After these there is the book of Psalms, then the Proverbs, next Ecclesiastes, and the Song of Songs. Job follows, then the Prophets, the twelve being reckoned as one book. Then Isaiah, one book, then Jeremiah with Baruch, Lamentations, and[5] the epistle, one book; afterward, Ezekiel and Daniel, each one book. Thus far constitutes the Old Testament. 5 Again it is not tedious to speak of the [books] of the New Testament. These are the four Gospels, according to Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. Afterward, the Acts of the Apostles and Epistles (called Catholic), seven, viz. of James, one; of Peter, two; of John, three; after these, one of Jude. In addition, there are fourteen Epistles of Paul, written in this order. The first, to the Romans; then two to the Corinthians; after these, to the Galatians; next, to the Ephesians; then to the Philippians; then to the Colossians; after these, two to the Thessalonians, and that to the Hebrews; and again, two to Timothy; one to Titus; and lastly, that to Philemon. And besides, the Revelation of John.” (Festal Letter 39:4-5)

There are others such as Phillo, Melito, Origen, Cyril etc. My point is that the books of the apocrypha were not accepted as canon universally and even other traditional churches, like the EO, have different books than the RC. It wasn’t until Trent that the CC made it official for the CC.
But you're still not wanting to understand how it works; the church, led by the Spirit, decides, not individuals-that's the only way it ever could work, in fact. And going by your criterion, the canon of the New Testament shoud be questionable since it was controversial, Luther, for one, having major problems with James, Hebrews, Jude, and Revelation. At least they ended up following the church on that one.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Hentenza

I will fear no evil for You are with me
Site Supporter
Mar 27, 2007
39,351
6,644
On the bus to Heaven
✟247,578.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
But you're still not wanting to understand how it works; the church, led by the Spirit, decides, not individuals-that's the only way it ever could work, in fact. And going by your criterion, the canon of the New Testament shoud be questionable since it was controversial, Luther, for one, having major problems with James, Hebrews, Jude, and Revelation. At least they ended up following the church on that one.
Luther was one and his opinion was not shared even narrowly. God works through people and the people are the church. The church is not a self sustaining entity but an entity composed of people. God will tier through the people that composed the early church to do His will.

The discussion was about the apocrypha not about the core 66 books of scripture. We had this conversation before.
 
Upvote 0

Valletta

Well-Known Member
Oct 10, 2020
13,794
6,084
Minnesota
✟368,344.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Jerome also stated that Judith, Tobit, and Maccabees were not scripture but that they could be read for edification.

“As, then, the Church reads Judith, Tobit, and the books of Maccabees, but does not admit them among the canonical Scriptures, so let it read these two volumes for the edification of the people, not to give authority to doctrines of the Church.” (Jerome, Prefaces to the Books of the Vulgate Version of the Old Testament, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, and the Song of Songs).

Athanasius was even more explicit as he explains which books belonged and the cannon and decried the apocrypha as not being scripture.

2 “But since we have made mention of heretics as dead, but of ourselves as possessing the Divine Scriptures for salvation; and since I fear lest, as Paul wrote to the Corinthians, some few of the simple should be beguiled from their simplicity and purity, by the subtility of certain men, and should henceforth read other books–those called apocryphal–led astray by the similarity of their names with the true books; I beseech you to bear patiently, if I also write, by way of remembrance, of matters with which you are acquainted, influenced by the need and advantage of the Church . . . 3. In proceeding to make mention of these things, I shall adopt, to commend my undertaking, the pattern of Luke the Evangelist, saying on my own account: ‘Forasmuch as some have taken in hand,’ to reduce into order for themselves the books termed apocryphal, and to mix them up with the divinely inspired Scripture, concerning which we have been fully persuaded, as they who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and ministers of the Word, delivered to the fathers; it seemed good to me also, having been urged thereto by true brethren, and having learned from the beginning, to set before you the books included in the Canon, and handed down, and accredited as Divine; to the end that any one who has fallen into error may condemn those who have led him astray; and that he who has continued stedfast in purity may again rejoice, having these things brought to his remembrance . . . 4 There are, then, of the Old Testament, twenty-two books in number; for, as I have heard, it is handed down that this is the number of the letters among the Hebrews; their respective order and names being as follows. The first is Genesis, then Exodus, next Leviticus, after that Numbers, and then Deuteronomy. Following these there is Joshua, the son of Nun, then Judges, then Ruth. And again, after these four books of Kings, the first and second being reckoned as one book, and so likewise the third and fourth as one book. And again, the first and second of the Chronicles are reckoned as one book. Again Ezra, the first and second(4a) are similarly one book. After these there is the book of Psalms, then the Proverbs, next Ecclesiastes, and the Song of Songs. Job follows, then the Prophets, the twelve being reckoned as one book. Then Isaiah, one book, then Jeremiah with Baruch, Lamentations, and[5] the epistle, one book; afterward, Ezekiel and Daniel, each one book. Thus far constitutes the Old Testament. 5 Again it is not tedious to speak of the [books] of the New Testament. These are the four Gospels, according to Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. Afterward, the Acts of the Apostles and Epistles (called Catholic), seven, viz. of James, one; of Peter, two; of John, three; after these, one of Jude. In addition, there are fourteen Epistles of Paul, written in this order. The first, to the Romans; then two to the Corinthians; after these, to the Galatians; next, to the Ephesians; then to the Philippians; then to the Colossians; after these, two to the Thessalonians, and that to the Hebrews; and again, two to Timothy; one to Titus; and lastly, that to Philemon. And besides, the Revelation of John.” (Festal Letter 39:4-5)

There are others such as Phillo, Melito, Origen, Cyril etc. My point is that the books of the apocrypha were not accepted as canon universally and even other traditional churches, like the EO, have different books than the RC. It wasn’t until Trent that the CC made it official for the CC.
As I previously stated, the process of the Catholic Church choosing the 73 books of the Bible spanned centuries, and the most common date of recognition of the established canon is 397 A.D. at the Council of Carthage. Before that time, and there were many saints before that time, there were of course differences of opinion, else no long process would have been necessary. While the decision was being made there were differences at masses of which books were used for readings, and again it was not settled until the Council of Carthage. People disagree, even the Apostles would sometimes disagree and discuss before a conclusion was reached. Saint Athanasius was dead for more than two decades before the canon was formalized. Jerome was said to have written the passage you quoted before the canon was formally established. We do know that by 402 A.D. Jerome had accepted the Deuterocanonicals as per the following quotation:

What sin have I committed if I followed the judgment of the churches? But he who brings charges against me for relating the objections that the Hebrews are wont to raise against the Story of Susanna, the Song of the Three Children, and the story of Bel and the Dragon, which are not found in the Hebrew volume, proves that he is just a foolish sycophant. For I was not relating my own personal views, but rather the remarks that they [the Jews] are wont to make against us. (Against Rufinus, 11:33 [AD 402]).
 
Upvote 0

fhansen

Oldbie
Sep 3, 2011
16,801
4,208
✟417,007.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Luther was one and his opinion was not shared even narrowly. God works through people and the people are the church. The church is not a self sustaining entity but an entity composed of people. God will tier through the people that composed the early church to do His will.

The discussion was about the apocrypha not about the core 66 books of scripture. We had this conversation before.
We certainly did have this conversation before, so excuse me if I’m a bit surprised by your unchanged offerings on it. Yes, the church is composed of people. And what did those people obviously affirm, at least for 17 centuries regardless of any controversy or personal opinions of some? An Old Testament comprised of 46 books. I mean, you can’t say that the church was guaranteed by God to get the NT right while not assuming the same for the OT.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Bro.T

Bible Christian
Site Supporter
Aug 17, 2008
3,004
351
U.S.
✟362,506.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Democrat
Over the years many have taught various ways to receive everlasting life. No wonder the world is full of so many denominations. All of these different doctrines, seemingly coming from the bible, tend only to confuse people. Most people don't know what to believe and simply choose not to attend any church. Salvation, what would you trade fore it? This is a question you should ask yourself. The answer should be nothing. What people fail to realize is Adam sin and brought forth the first and second death, and that second is the lake of fire. Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned: (Romans 5: 12)

So at this point the creation is lock under these two death, this is before Jesus of course. I find that a lot of people don’t understand this. We have a lot righteous prophets and people in the old testament, but still lock under those two death. We also have a lot of evil people in the old testament who will still be lock under those two death. If you are lock under those two death, this mean you will be raise from dead, and Judged, then headed straight for the lake of fire. So now, Jesus came and die for the world and bless us with grace, so that our righteousness which will remove the second death.

Jesus says in Luke: 31 And Jesus answering said unto them, They that are whole need not a physician; but they that are sick. 32 I came not to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance. See sin is what got us these two death in the first place. Let’s take a look at the biblical definition of sin. 1John 3:4) Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law. Now we have just read the biblical definition of sin, the transgression (breaking) of the law (commandments.)

So when you sin, you transgress the law, what law? The Commandments brother and Sisters. And this is love, that we walk after his commandments. This is the commandment, That, as ye have heard from the beginning, ye should walk in it. Look to yourselves, that we lose not those things which we have wrought, but that we receive a full reward. Whosoever transgresseth, and abideth not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God. He that abideth in the doctrine of Christ, he hath both the Father and the Son. (2 John 1: 6,8,9)

So if you think because Jesus die for our sins, and you don’t have to keep the law (Commandments) then you are sinning, and Paul told us in Romans 6: 23 For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.
 
  • Like
Reactions: fhansen
Upvote 0

Hentenza

I will fear no evil for You are with me
Site Supporter
Mar 27, 2007
39,351
6,644
On the bus to Heaven
✟247,578.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
As I previously stated,
I know. I read and replied to your previous post.
the process of the Catholic Church
It was the church universal at that time. But I’m not interested in pursuing the line of argumentation. Secondly, God is always in control not your church.
choosing the 73 books of the Bible spanned centuries,
God chose the 66 books of scripture by the 4th century. The apocrypha, including which books, was not quite settled until Trent which only applied to your church. As I stated in my post the books of the apocrypha, including which books, are still in contention as other churches have different books than those of your church. That alone should give you pause.
and the most common date of recognition of the established canon is 397 A.D. at the Council of Carthage.
Agreed.
Before that time, and there were many saints before that time, there were of course differences of opinion, else no long process would have been necessary. While the decision was being made there were differences at masses of which books were used for readings, and again it was not settled until the Council of Carthage. People disagree, even the Apostles would sometimes disagree and discuss before a conclusion was reached. Saint Athanasius was dead for more than two decades before the canon was formalized. Jerome was said to have written the passage you quoted before the canon was formally established. We do know that by 402 A.D. Jerome had accepted the Deuterocanonicals as per the following quotation:

What sin have I committed if I followed the judgment of the churches? But he who brings charges against me for relating the objections that the Hebrews are wont to raise against the Story of Susanna, the Song of the Three Children, and the story of Bel and the Dragon, which are not found in the Hebrew volume, proves that he is just a foolish sycophant. For I was not relating my own personal views, but rather the remarks that they [the Jews] are wont to make against us. (Against Rufinus, 11:33 [AD 402]).
Yes, Jerome eventually relented and included the books in the Vulgate. However, initially he had separated the books from the rest of the canon and put them in their own area just as the Protestant bibles did after the reformation.
 
Upvote 0

Valletta

Well-Known Member
Oct 10, 2020
13,794
6,084
Minnesota
✟368,344.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
God chose the 66 books of scripture by the 4th century.
All European Bibles contained 73 books from the time the Catholic Church chose the 73 books of the Bible (in the late 300s) up until the reformation. Protestants dropped seven but as part of their tradition use the same order used by the Catholic Church. Realize the Bible contains the liturgical books of the Catholic Church, the books chosen by the Catholic Church to be allowed to be read at mass.
 
Upvote 0

fhansen

Oldbie
Sep 3, 2011
16,801
4,208
✟417,007.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Yes, Jerome eventually relented and included the books in the Vulgate. However, initially he had separated the books from the rest of the canon and put them in their own area just as the Protestant bibles did after the reformation.
Yes, Jerome would eventually follow the wisdom of the church, as Augustine, his contemporary, already agreed with. But even if Augustine had disagreed, it would have no bearing on the decision of the church. Disagreements mean exactly nothing. A huge contingent of the Christian world once leaned towards Arianism, but that doesn't make the doctine right. And the church voted agaisnt it.
 
Upvote 0

Hentenza

I will fear no evil for You are with me
Site Supporter
Mar 27, 2007
39,351
6,644
On the bus to Heaven
✟247,578.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
We certainly did have this conversation before, so excuse me if I’m a bit surprised by your unchanged offerings on it.
Why would you be? Your arguments were not very persuasive.
Yes, the church is composed of people. And what did those people obviously affirm, at least for 17 centuries regardless of any controversy or personal opinions of some? An Old Testament comprised of 46 books. I mean, you can’t say that the church was guaranteed by God to get the NT right while not assuming the same for the OT.
The OT is also inspired scripture so God did have a hand in choosing His books. The fact still remains that the books of the apocrypha were not universally accepted until Trent and then by your church while other churches, including the EO, have different books than your church. Among the mainstream churches the 66 books are universally accepted while the books of the apocrypha differ among churches. I don’t believe God made a mistake.
 
Upvote 0

Valletta

Well-Known Member
Oct 10, 2020
13,794
6,084
Minnesota
✟368,344.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Why would you be? Your arguments were not very persuasive.

The OT is also inspired scripture so God did have a hand in choosing His books. The fact still remains that the books of the apocrypha were not universally accepted until Trent and then by your church while other churches, including the EO, have different books than your church. Among the mainstream churches the 66 books are universally accepted while the books of the apocrypha differ among churches. I don’t believe God made a mistake.
Certainly the Holy Spirit was there to inspire the Catholic Church to choose the books of the Bible and there to guide the Church in that choice. Luther was able to get some, but not all of the books he wanted dropped from the Protestant version of the Bible. If by "mainstream" you mean Protestant, it is true they started a 66 book during the reformation.
 
Upvote 0

Hentenza

I will fear no evil for You are with me
Site Supporter
Mar 27, 2007
39,351
6,644
On the bus to Heaven
✟247,578.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
All European Bibles contained 73 books from the time the Catholic Church chose the 73 books of the Bible (in the late 300s) up until the reformation. Protestants dropped seven but as part of their tradition use the same order used by the Catholic Church.
Protestants did not dropped 7 books but merely separated them as Jerome )and others) had initially done. The KJV contained them in their own area and so did many bible translations after that. You can still buy bibles today that include these books.
Realize the Bible contains the liturgical books of the Catholic Church, the books chosen by the Catholic Church to be allowed to be read at mass.
Since your church officially chose them at Trent that is understandable but do remember that other liturgical churches, such as the EO, contain different (and additional) books than your church.
 
Upvote 0

Hentenza

I will fear no evil for You are with me
Site Supporter
Mar 27, 2007
39,351
6,644
On the bus to Heaven
✟247,578.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Certainly the Holy Spirit was there to inspire the Catholic Church to choose the books of the Bible and there to guide the Church in that choice.
The Holy Spirit iindeed inspired and guided the people from the church universal that chose the books of scripture.
Luther was able to get some, but not all of the books he wanted dropped from the Protestant version of the Bible.
Luther did not get any books dropped from the Protestant Bible. All 27 books and all 39 books of scripture remain while the books of the apocrypha remained in their own section.
If by "mainstream" you mean Protestant, it is true they started a 66 book during the reformation.
No. I mean mainstream which includes your church.
 
Upvote 0

fhansen

Oldbie
Sep 3, 2011
16,801
4,208
✟417,007.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
Why would you be? Your arguments were not very persuasive.
Of course..not all find the truth to be persuasive.
The OT is also inspired scripture so God did have a hand in choosing His books.
And He left it up to us, albeit guided by the Holy Spirit, to determine which Scriptures are inspired and which are not.
The fact still remains that the books of the apocrypha were not universally accepted until Trent and then by your church while other churches, including the EO,

Well, 1700 or more years of continuous acceptance at least makes it universal within the Catholic Chruch. And since the Eastern Churches unanimously did not exclude the deuterocanonical books while most also accepted them as inspired, then I think the term "universal" is certainly a far closer fit than virtually any other classification might be. In fact, in the midst of that very universality it comes across as quite odd and arrogant for anyone to change that canon, and then nearly change the NT canon as well. And the late-coming "mainstream" mainly just went along with a few of the main fellow protesters in their ABC, anything-but-Catholic, agenda in order to come up with the neater, cleaner and smaller canon thery preferred.
 
Upvote 0