Why should we believe?

[phillipoffrance]

If there are dozens of gospels, but arrogant power hungry men the dark ages chose which gospels were 'true'.

 

[prodromos]

If there are dozens of gospels, but arrogant power hungry men the dark ages chose which gospels were 'true'.

From what I understand, the biblical Canon was settled in the West in councils held from 382 to 419. The beginning of the Dark Ages is not until the fall of the Western Roman Empire in 476. Neither could the bishops who sat on these aforementioned councils be described as 'arrogant power hungry men'.
You also have the problem that pretty much the same Canon was used in the East which was not particularly influenced by those Western councils, nor did the East experience a so called 'Dark Age'.

John

 

[phillipoffrance]

My phrasing was provocative. However still the point is

'PRETTY MUCH the same canon was used'

And what was decided was still decided by MEN in a position of power.

 

[revanneosl]

Why do you assume that they were arrogant and power-hungry? I think that it would be fairer to characterize them as devout men, concerned that people know the truth about the gospel. We may disagree with their conclusions. I may (for instance) wish that they had left the Revelation to John out of the Bible. But I don't think that there is any need to attribute evil intentions to them.

 

[prodromos]

My phrasing was provocative. However still the point is

'PRETTY MUCH the same canon was used'

And what was decided was still decided by MEN in a position of power.

It was decided by men in a position of responsibility. That of upholding the truth and faithfully passing on the faith handed down once by the Apostles.

John