Some more questions..

[Skripper]

Jesus gave us a shephard and Peter was his name.

*Sung to the melody of "B-i-n-g-o" *

P-e-t-e-r . . . P-e-t-e-r . . . P-e-t-e-r . . . and Peter was his name-o!

 

[Benedicta00]

I thought the same thing. Oh my, I'm thinking like David.

 

[Benedicta00]

That's supposed to be Shelb's line.

Scary.

Ahem…

 

[raptor13]

A conundrum I would say. Perhaps he could, like Luther, just rip out 1Peter and 2Peter...but then again, there are many references in the other epistles to Peter's teaching and of course there is the whole Gospel of Mark that is commonly understood to be the teachings of Peter regarding the life of Christ....well dump that too. The man can't be trusted!

Why end with the Gospel of Mark? The denial of Apostolic Authority renders into question the entire Canon. After all, how can fallible people choose an infallible canon? Why is the canon closed anyway? Who had any right to do that?

 

[Alexis OCA]

Why is the canon closed anyway? Who had any right to do that?

We had a discussion on the canon quite recently. It is also very easy to research the Catholic positon. See www.NewAdvent.com and look under canon.

Suffice it to say, The Council of Trent had the authority. It used specific criteria to determine what was canonical and what was not.

The Council had to defend the integrity of the New Testament as well as the Old against the attacks of the pseudo-Reformers, Luther, basing his action on dogmatic reasons and the judgment of antiquity, had discarded Hebrews, James, Jude, and Apocalypse as altogether uncanonical. Zwingli could not see in Apocalypse a Biblical book.

The Church and her history were under attack and Trent took action to protect the deposit of Faith.