Posted on 04/28/2015 9:30:05 AM PDT by NRx
...The “Bible,” a single book with the whole of the Scriptures included, is indeed modern. It is a by-product of the printing press, fostered by the doctrines of Protestantism. For it is not until the advent of Protestant teaching that the concept of the Bible begins to evolve into what it has become today. The New Testament uses the word “scriptures” (literally, “the writings”) when it refers to the Old Testament, but it is a very loose term. There was no authoritative notion of a canon of the Old Testament. There were the Books of Moses and the Prophets (cf. Luke 24:27) and there were other writings (the Psalms, Proverbs, etc.). But writers of the New Testament seem to have had no clear guide for what is authoritative and what is not. The book of Jude makes use of the Assumption of Moses as well as the Book of Enoch, without so much as a blush. There are other examples of so-called “non-canonical” works in the New Testament.
(Excerpt) Read more at blogs.ancientfaith.com ...
FYI: Fr. Stephen is NOT Roman Catholic. I thought I’d get that out before everyone starts lobbing shots at the Romans.
The the beginning, there was the Word.
“The the beginning, there was the Word.”
The Word is Jesus Christ, not the Bible
The Bible is not the Word of God?
What is he?
This is so much bull squeeze.
We just went through this in my Church.
There are 5600 manuscripts which exist from which the Scriptures are derived. Several areas of concentration (Byzantine, Caesarian, Alexandrian, and European - need to check my notes, but these are what i remember).
Scripture veracity is ascertained by comparison of manuscripts with each other.
‘Pod.
The Son of God, consubstantial with the Father, begotten not made before time, the Second Person of the Holy Trinity, 100% Divine and 100% human.
So while trolling about, why don’t you answer this; Are protestants true Christians? A simple ‘yes’ or ‘no’ will do.
I have to assume your article means that the early Christians had no Christian guide for their canon... Jews have had one since the start of the second Temple:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Assembly
“Are protestants true Christians? A simple ‘yes’ or ‘no’ will do.”
Since Protestantism comes in multiple flavors, that can’t be answered with a blanket yes or no. The best I can give you is, most are, some are not.
No, the Gospels are the source for most of what we know about Jesus. Read the article.
Your question is a gotcha type question and is bogus at that.
The real premise is the following:
Anyone who professes faith in Christ and follows Him is a Christian.
If I remember my history correctly, the first NT scriptures that were accepted by the early church were, the four gospels, Acts, the letters of Paul (except Hebrews), 1 Peter and 1 John.
There were lots of other letters floating around with uncertain authorship or false doctrines.
Then came MARCION who began to collect and edit out anything dealing with the Jews, making them say what HE wanted them to say. Matthew, Mark and John were gone.
The Church then began an effort to also collect all the scrolls and turn them into books, when they realized just how many were floating around out there.
After all was said and done, the Greek OT was accepted, and the NT was what they already accepted with a later addition of 2 Peter, James, additional letters of John, Jude and Revelation. A few early bibles had the fabrication of THE SHEPHERD OF HERMAS in them but it was never considered real scripture.
I think you want to include the OT and the NT in your understanding of Jesus.
In the Gospels, Jesus quotes from some (all?) the books considered part of the Old Testament canon. Obviously, those then belong. First century Christian writers, including Bible writers, quoted from the same books and letters.
The overall message of the books in the traditional Old and New Testaments is consistent throughout, despite being written (recorded) by 40 different men over a period of 1,600 years. No modern work can compete.
Quote-No, the Gospels are the source for most of what we know about Jesus. Read the article
And amazingly, Paul could preach and teach the gospel by using the scriptures that he knew..
What we would call the old testament,,
Heck, one chapter gives us the gospel of the Lamb slain, buried and raised the third day as first Fruits- Leviticus 23..
Brings real literal meaning to Word became flesh but that gets missed with things like ‘good Friday’ and ‘easter Sunday’..
I am guessing this ‘Father’ ascribes to that ‘gospel’.
Another excellent point linking the books we consider part of the Bible, as well as giving evidence of their authenticity — there are over 300 prophecies foretelling various aspects of Jesus’ birth, life, ministry, and sacrifice. How would that be if many of those books were in fact non-canonical?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.