The Bible, as it is today, how did it come about, & what did Emperor Diocletian have to do with it?

[PeaceByJesus]

See above.

 

[PeaceByJesus]

Dear redleghunter,

Thanks for your reply. No, you have not exactly summarizing my position correctly. First of all, correct me if I am wrong, your use of the term "self assured" sounds a bit derogatory. In any event, let me restate what you think I said.

Christ is a God of infinite perfection and precision and as such, doesn't make mistakes. Christ came to earth and He founded His Church on the 12 apostles (the first Bishops of the Catholic Church). (Matthew 16:18-19) and Christ gave Peter and the apostle’s absolute authority to make rules and regulations to govern His church – “I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.”

Later in Matthew 18-18, He gives the same authority to all the apostles as a group: “Amen I say to you, whatsoever you shall bind upon earth, shall be bound also in heaven; and whatsoever you shall loose upon earth, shall be loosed also in heaven.” This is Christ’s assurance that when the Bishops meet in a council, they will be guided by the Holy Spirit.

The power of binding loosing, like that of "any thing that they shall ask," is not an autocratic power, one that can add to the word of God such as inventing ordained church offices, but such is subject to the will of God, and conformity with Scripture. This applies to the church and it also did to the Scribes and Pharisees. Who, though they sat in the seat of Moses, were reproved by the Lord from Scripture for teaching ss doctrines the traditions of men. Based on Catholic logic, they had that power, however, the Lord makes it clear they were not above Scripture. (Mark 7:2-16)

S The power of binding loosing actually flows from the OT, judicially to bind or loose one from guilt, (Dt. 17:8-13) and even civil courts have that power (Matthew 18:34) as well as husbands or fathers to bind or loose a wife or daughter to her vow. (Numbers 30:1-15) Yet formal judicial actions by the church are executed under leadership, not autocratically but in union with all the church. (Matthew 18:16-18; which text in context deals with personal disputes). The formal corporate judicial binding and loosing is seen in action in 1 Corinthians 5:3-5. Likewise is the corporate nature of forgiveness by the body that was harmed by public sin. (2 Corinthians 2:10-11)

But as seen in Matthew 18:19-20 and James 5:16-18, the spiritual power of binding and loosing are is not restricted to clergy, but as many of Elijah-type righteousness and fervent prayer (Elijah bound and loosed the heavens). ​

Some people think that after a few hundred years the Catholic Church went off in to left field. This idea is most illogical and unscriptural. Is a God of infinite perfection and precision going to allow his Church to fall apart? NO!

Once again you manifest you are a victim or a purveyor of prevaricating propaganda. We see in Scripture how God preserved Truth and the faith, which was not by the novel and unScriptural premise of ensured perpetual magisterial infallibility as per Rome (and basically in primary cults), but often by rising up men from without the magisterial powers, who reprove it, and by making Scripture the preserved standard. As was explained.

Meanwhile you must allow history to attest that the Catholic Church went off in to left field even morally, and actions show what one really believes - and to much fall apart. As [FONT=Arial, sans-serif]Cardinal [/FONT]Ratzinger observed,

"For nearly half a century, the Church was split into two or three obediences that excommunicated one another, so that every Catholic lived under excommunication by one pope or another, and, in the last analysis, no one could say with certainty which of the contenders had right on his side. The Church no longer offered certainty of salvation; she had become questionable in her whole objective form--the true Church, the true pledge of salvation, had to be sought outside the institution. ​

"It is against this background of a profoundly shaken ecclesial consciousness that we are to understand that Luther, in the conflict between his search for salvation and the tradition of the Church, ultimately came to experience the Church, not as the guarantor, but as the adversary of salvation. (Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, head of the Sacred Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith for the Church of Rome, “Principles of Catholic Theology,”​

Catholic historian Paul Johnson additionally described the existing social situation among the clergy during this period leading up to the Refomation:

“Probably as many as half the men in orders had ‘wives’ and families. Behind all the New Learning and the theological debates, clerical celibacy was, in its own way, the biggest single issue at the Reformation. It was a great social problem and, other factors being equal, it tended to tip the balance in favour of reform. As a rule, the only hope for a child of a priest was to go into the Church himself, thus unwillingly or with no great enthusiasm, taking vows which he might subsequently regret: the evil tended to perpetuate itself.” (History of Christianity, pgs 269-270)​

More .
Christ did not start a “Bible Believing” Church, He started a teaching Church, a Church which he promised to keep free from error “…and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it” (Matthew 16:18).

The Catholic Church is a necessary means of salvation, established by Christ, and it will exist, error free, for all time till the end of the world.

Pure bombast, and which is no more true than for those who actually sat in the seat of Moses. Rome is contrary to how the NT church began, and her distinctives are not manifest in the only wholly inspired substantive authoritative record of what the NT church believed (including how they understood the OT and gospels) is Scripture, especially Acts thru Revelation.

for you and I, the average person in the pew, we need an infallible source or authority to give us the correct meaning of the scriptures.

Really? Then how did the common people recognize both men and writings of God as being so before the church even began? Answer me.

May I suggest that you watch the following interview, as it will shed much light on our discussion. Dr. Anders was a Presbyterian historian who did his Ph.D. in Reformation history.

Anders the apostate made the fundamental fatal mistake of making uninspired writings of men deterministic of what the NT church believed, vs. the only wholly inspired substantive authoritative record of what the NT church believed (including how they understood the OT and gospels) is Scripture, especially Acts thru Revelation, in which Catholic distinctives are not manifest.

Repent and believe.

Be back much later.