Is Church necessary?

[JoeP222w]

Can you tell me where does the Bible give a table content to know which books are in the Bible?

The contents of scripture were defined when God breathed it into existence through men inspired by the Holy Spirit.

And if you follow that logic, it cause 2 major problems:

1. Those who reject Sola Scriptura have to answer the same question, which results in Sola Ekklesia (that the Church is the ultimate authority).
2. You then need an infinite regression of infallible "table of contents".

 

[JoeP222w]

And you are correct and infallible?

No, never claimed I was. But my ultimate source of truth and authority is God, not me. My correctness of God breathed scripture comes from God.

 

[JoeP222w]

Ah, so men were infallible when they decided that books like James and Jude should be part of the Bible and not the Epistle of Barnabas or the Shepard of Hermas but they were fallible in everything else.

This operates under the false assumption that man decides what is in the Bible. This is not true. God defines scripture during the process of inscripturation. Man has no role in deciding what is in scripture.

 

[Tayla]

You have praise and worship, one pastor who preaches a sermon, and congregation that checks there good Christian card every Sunday.

Is this what the Church was supposed to be?

This is not what the early church practiced.

 

[Not David]

The contents of scripture were defined when God breathed it into existence through men inspired by the Holy Spirit.

And if you follow that logic, it cause 2 major problems:

1. Those who reject Sola Scriptura have to answer the same question, which results in Sola Ekklesia (that the Church is the ultimate authority).
2. You then need an infinite regression of infallible "table of contents".

There were councils that defined what they believed, just look at the council in Jerusalem.

 

[Not David]

No, never claimed I was. But my ultimate source of truth and authority is God, not me. My correctness of God breathed scripture comes from God.

Like all of the people who claim to follow only the Bible yet, there are like 10 gazillions denominations with different beliefs.

 

[Not David]

This operates under the false assumption that man decides what is in the Bible. This is not true. God defines scripture during the process of inscripturation. Man has no role in deciding what is in scripture.

Yet you allowed Luther to decide which books shouldn't be considered Scripture.

 

[2Timothy2:15]

Lol, you sound like those atheists who think doing miracles is magic.

Or maybe I am with a group of folks who rightly divides the word of God.

History of the Heresy of Transubstantiation | Truth Watchers

 

[JoeP222w]

Like all of the people who claim to follow only the Bible yet, there are like 10 gazillions denominations with different beliefs.

How man abuses the word of God does not have any effect on the truth and authority of the word of God.

 

[JoeP222w]

There were councils that defined what they believed, just look at the council in Jerusalem.

Defining what they believe is different than them being the authority on what is the word of God.

 

[JoeP222w]

Yet you allowed Luther to decide which books shouldn't be considered Scripture.

You could not be more wrong. Luther did not define the canon of scripture just as no council defined the canon of scripture. God defined the canon of scripture.

 

[truefiction1]

If you believe that the Bible was put together by man, you are denying the truth of scripture. And even those who were present when the canon of scripture was written, that does not mean that they were infallible in all of their beliefs and understandings of God. Scriptures infallibility and inerrancy is not dependent on man, but on the fact that it is God breathed.

Church authorities declared within the Church which of the many Christian manuscripts in circulation in their times were to be treated as Scripture and which were not. This is a fact of Church history whether you choose to accept it or not. That Christ ordained His disciples to have authority within His Church, when working together in council with each other and the Holy Spirit to do such things as declare which books are canonical and which are not, and that their authority to do such things is passed also to those whom they also ordain to carry on their authority, is also a fact of Church history and is the teaching of Scripture, whether you accept it or not.

 

[truefiction1]

The contents of scripture were defined when God breathed it into existence through men inspired by the Holy Spirit.

And if you follow that logic, it cause 2 major problems:

1. Those who reject Sola Scriptura have to answer the same question, which results in Sola Ekklesia (that the Church is the ultimate authority).
2. You then need an infinite regression of infallible "table of contents".

No, Scripture together with the Church is the ultimate authority. Neither of these has fullness of authority without the other, because Scripture doesn't interpret itself, and when fallible men do, who have nothing to check their own interpretations against, then vain traditions of men arise in result. That is why the Bible does not teach sola Scriptura. That idea is philosophy of men which arose during the revolt against the schismatic Roman Church.

 

[Not David]

Or maybe I am with a group of folks who rightly divides the word of God.

History of the Heresy of Transubstantiation | Truth Watchers

I was talking about the Real Presence, which Eastern Orthodox, Oriental Orthodox and the Assyrian Church of the East also believe.