Protestant canon

[Montalban]

No. I agree that we do works, but we aren't saved by them. Only the blood of Christ can save us.

What's the point in doing something that doesn't lead to salvation?

 

[Montalban]

You're lil' cartoon buddy says I said I don't care about 'the canon' & some other nonsense he dreamed up while he was supposed to be payin' attention to what he was readin'. Thank you for caring. You can be a very gracious person.

What happened is one person says they don't follow one canon, that they don't think that there's one. They don't care to choose one, but to only attack EO and RCC (oddly enough not attacking any Protestant's canon).

Then they say "I'm investigating this".

I asked "How are you investigating this?"

And am told "I'm investigating this, don't you pay attention?"

Aside from the example in irony it's another question not answered.

It's simply a case of avoiding taking a particular stand so as to go on attacking RCC and EO with apparent impunity

 

[JacktheCatholic]

What's the point in doing something that doesn't lead to salvation?

Actions that lead to Salvation are like taking steps in Jesus' wake. Jesus did good works out of love and charity and so should we. Right?

 

[Ortho_Cat]

What's the point in doing something that doesn't lead to salvation?

When I was Protestant I always was told that you are storing up treasures in heaven, crowns etc. The idea never really appealed to me, and seemed kinda selfish...

 

[Montalban]

When I was Protestant I always was told that you are storing up treasures in heaven, crowns etc. The idea never really appealed to me, and seemed kinda selfish...

It's never made sense to me, one's either saved, or not. I'm not sure of Salvation+ (as in salvation + treasure)

 

[Montalban]

Actions that lead to Salvation are like taking steps in Jesus' wake. Jesus did good works out of love and charity and so should we. Right?

I think that's why he said "I am the WAY", a way of living.

 

[SummaScriptura]

<snip>Polycarp's associate Melito went to Palestine to determine the OT scripture and returned with the same Protestant OT (less Esther). No Tobit, no Maccs, no any deuteros.<snip>

Please cite the source, I'd like to read up on that. There must have been a reason he went to Israel "to determine" the O.T.

At this late date he couldn't just look in his church's library?

There was low-level controversy in the Church during the three centuries prior to Jerome.

There were some, not all, who laid claim to the ideal of an O.T. based only upon the Jewish canon. They did so in a very theoheretical fashion apparently, because the weird thing of it is, those very people who subscribed to the theoretical idea of a narrower canon, can be found maintaing the practice of the Church by teaching from and citing the "Apocrypha" and calling it "Scripture", or using the "it is written" prefatory which was reserved for inspired writings.

Since there is no doctrine of canonization in Scripture, and since controversies are not any more determinative for me on this question than the edicts of councils and synods. When apporaching the question of canon, the dominant practice of the Church from the earliest times is most determinative for me.

If Melito went "to determine" I wonder what was the context. It is possible he was controverting Polycarp's use of those books.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

I think that's why he said "I am the WAY", a way of living.

The way...

Blue Letter Bible - Lexicon
Strong's Number G3598 matches the Greek &#8001;&#948;&#8057;&#962; (hodos), which occurs 102 times in 99 verses in the Greek concordance of the KJV

Last time used in NT/NC:

Young) Revelation 16:12 And the sixth messenger did pour out his vial upon the great river, the Euphrates, and dried up was its water, that the way/odoV <3598> of the kings ,who are from the rising of the sun may be made ready;

http://www.christianforums.com/t7467399/#post54725165
Euphrates dried on 9 11

 

[Montalban]

That's the way God planned it

 

[SummaScriptura]

<snip>Polycarp's associate Melito went to Palestine to determine the OT scripture and returned with the same Protestant OT (less Esther). No Tobit, no Maccs, no any deuteros.<snip>

Please cite the source, I'd like to read up on that. There must have been a reason he went to Israel "to determine" the O.T.

At this late date he couldn't just look in his church's library?

There was low-level controversy in the Church during the three centuries prior to Jerome.

There were some, not all, who laid claim to the ideal of an O.T. based only upon the Jewish canon. They did so in a very theoheretical fashion apparently, because the weird thing of it is, those very people who subscribed to the theoretical idea of a narrower canon, can be found maintaing the practice of the Church by teaching from and citing the "Apocrypha" and calling it "Scripture", or using the "it is written" prefatory which was reserved for inspired writings.

Since there is no doctrine of canonization in Scripture, and since controversies are not any more determinative for me on this question than the edicts of councils and synods. When apporaching the question of canon, the dominant practice of the Church from the earliest times is most determinative for me.

If Melito went "to determine" I wonder what was the context. It is possible he was controverting Polycarp's use of those books.

Did we loose you?

 

[Ortho_Cat]

Did we loose you?

as in binding and loosing?

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Originally Posted by SummaScriptura Did we loose you?

From what I know, the RCC and EOC loosed each other, and now we are torn betwix the 2 of them

http://www.christianforums.com/t6790703-31/#post43066817

Following the rule of Charlemagne, Christianity spread throughout Europe which served as a unifying force for the continent. This was in part due to the Great Schism of 1054 where two competing religious authorities, Pope Leo IX of the Roman Catholic Church, and Patriarch Michael I of the Eastern Orthodox faith, excommunicated each other in a dispute over authority..............

 

[Standing Up]

Please cite the source, I'd like to read up on that. There must have been a reason he went to Israel "to determine" the O.T.

At this late date he couldn't just look in his church's library?

C175ad. Here's a few links:

NPNF2-01. Eusebius Pamphilius: Church History, Life of Constantine, Oration in Praise of Constantine | Christian Classics Ethereal Library (p 13, 14)

ANF08. The Twelve Patriarchs, Excerpts and Epistles, The Clementia, Apocrypha, Decretals, Memoirs of Edessa and Syriac Documents, Remains of the First | Christian Classics Ethereal Library

and,

Wherefore, going into the East, and to 47the very place where these things were published and transacted, and having made diligent search after the books of the Old Testament, I now subjoin and send you the following catalogue:&#8212;&#8220;Five books of Moses, viz., Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy, Joshua, Judges, Ruth, four books of Kings, two of Chronicles, the Psalms of David, the Proverbs of Solomon, or Wisdom,18

18Whether Melito, in his catalogue, by the word Wisdom, meant to designate a distinct book; or whether it was used as another name for Proverbs, seems doubtful. The latter has generally been understood to be the sense; and this accords with the understanding of the ancients; for Rufin, in his translation of this passage of Eusebius renders &#960;&#945;&#961;&#959;&#953;&#956;&#953;&#945;&#953; &#951; &#963;&#959;&#966;&#8049;&#945; Salomonis Proverbia, quæ est sapientia; that is, The Proverbs of Solomon, which is Wisdom. Pineda, a learned Romanist, says, &#8220;The word Wisdom should here be taken as explicative of the former, and should be understood to mean, The Proverbs.&#8221;

Ecclesiastes, the Song of Songs, Job, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Twelve [prophets] in one book, Daniel, Ezekiel, Ezra.&#8221;19
Canon of the Old and New Testaments Ascertained, or The Bible Complete without the Apocrypha and Unwritten Traditions. | Christian Classics Ethereal Library

Two things. Melito's use of "Old Testament" implies there was an extant "New Testament". His OT is the same as the Protestant NT, except for Esther (perhaps just an oversight, or excluded because of political situation).

There were some, not all, who laid claim to the ideal of an O.T. based only upon the Jewish canon. They did so in a very theoheretical fashion apparently, because the weird thing of it is, those very people who subscribed to the theoretical idea of a narrower canon, can be found maintaing the practice of the Church by teaching from and citing the "Apocrypha" and calling it "Scripture", or using the "it is written" prefatory which was reserved for inspired writings.

You're familiar with Josephus' comments about it?

Since there is no doctrine of canonization in Scripture, and since controversies are not any more determinative for me on this question than the edicts of councils and synods. When apporaching the question of canon, the dominant practice of the Church from the earliest times is most determinative for me.

IMO there is a doctrine of canonization given to us by Jesus. OT is the period between blood of Abel and Zachariah. NT is the period between James and John, the first and last apostles to die.

There's other issues, but those are the time frames.

If Melito went "to determine" I wonder what was the context. It is possible he was controverting Polycarp's use of those books.

Melito as bishop was asked to go. But I doubt he was disagreeing with someone from 25 years earlier. Given the lineage from Josephus c100ad to a mere 75 years later with Melito at c175ad and Polycarp in the same geographic area and belief structure (John, Philip, and other apostles (Melito and Polycarp were both quartodecimans)), and between the two times c150ad, I'd argue they all agreed on the OT scripture and reason for it.

Plus, again we don't have the greek original of Polycarp, but only the later latin version. And as someone else pointed out Polycarp would more likely be citing Luke, not Tobit.

 

[Montalban]

Funny that there was just one OT

 

[Montalban]

The way...

Waaaaaaay!!!

 

[Ortho_Cat]

So why use the canon mentioned by a few selects men (some of which weren't even Christians) rather than that decided on by many at carthage/hippo? Why do they have pre-eminence? If you refer to tradition, you should be able to show why one source of tradition is more authoratitave than another.

 

[Montalban]

So why use the canon mentioned by a few selects men (some of which weren't even Christians) rather than that decided on by many at carthage/hippo? Why do they have pre-eminence? If you refer to tradition, you should be able to show why one source of tradition is more authoratitave than another.

It always going to get back to this question. All the rest is just skipping about the main issue. Someone's going to have set it down, sometime.

 

[Ortho_Cat]

From what I know, the RCC and EOC loosed each other, and now we are torn betwix the 2 of them

http://www.christianforums.com/t6790703-31/#post43066817

Following the rule of Charlemagne, Christianity spread throughout Europe which served as a unifying force for the continent. This was in part due to the Great Schism of 1054 where two competing religious authorities, Pope Leo IX of the Roman Catholic Church, and Patriarch Michael I of the Eastern Orthodox faith, excommunicated each other in a dispute over authority..............

Wait, before I protest, which one represents the EOC, the girl on the left, or on the right?

 

[Montalban]

Wait, before I protest, which one represents the EOC, the girl on the left, or on the right?

Lookin' good for 2,000 year old, anyway!

 

[Montalban]

BUMP

When was the Protestant canon form/formalised? And, by whom?