Posted on 01/18/2002 6:11:04 AM PST by 1stFreedom
Folks, I'm reposting this article, edited so as to not appear to be attacking anybody.
I'd like your opinion, as this is an article in working progress. If you agree, disagree, have facts & figures, I'd appreciate your comments.
I've purposely left out the controversy over the OT beacause 1. I need to do some research, and 2. The focus of this article is on the agreed upon NT cannon. (It's more for discussion of NT amongst different denominations). I'll write another article on the OT, or incorporate it here.
THE CATHOLIC CHURCH AND THE BIBLE
INTRODUCTION
Many schools of theology contend that the Church had a falling away, or went apostate, not too long after the death of the last Apostle. The approximate date varies, with 100AD for Jehovah Witnesses and 312AD for Calvinists and Mormons.
ERRANT CHURCH
If the Church had indeed fallen away from the faith, then this presents a very serious problem for the Church. The problem is so large it is a showstopper and it calls into question the validity of the faith itself.
The problem is this: If the Church was indeed apostate, then how could anything handled by the Church be trusted? Could any major (not minor) tenant taught or produced by the errant Church be considered valid? If so, then how can the modern Church accept a major tenant from an apostate Church?
EARLY CHRISTIANITY
Contrary to the current wide availability of the New Testament, the first believers did not have a copy of the New Testament.
The first Christians had the blessing of hearing the teachings of Christ personally. The apostles carried these teachings to various foreign lands for many years afterwards.
These Christians had no cannon of Scriptures, and in fact, some of the scriptures were being written during this period. (Such as the Epistles, which were letters to the various churches.)
Those who came after the time of the twelve apostles continued to teach the Gospel as well as the writings of the Apostles.
But there were also other writings that were considered to be inspired. One could even go as far as to argue that the Didichae or the Shepard of Hermas could be candidates for consideration of being divinely inspired. The early Church had to determine whether or not various writings were inspired. This didn't happen overnight.
Through the course of time, well after the earliest possible date (100ad) of a supposed apostasy, various writings were examined, tested, debated, and validated/invalidated by the Church.
THE CANNON IS RECOGNIZED
Thee first real recognition of the cannon of the New Testament came in the late 300’s (two synods, one in 382 and one in 392). This recognition is not the absolute “official” cannon, but rather just recognition of the NT cannon of Scripture.
NOTE: The Church rarely puts a stamp of official approval on anything until there is a serious dispute. This is why it wasn’t until the Council of Trent that the “official” cannon was “certified” – there was no serious dispute till that time frame (minor disputes? yes). The “unofficial” “official” cannon was recognized for centuries, but only certified at Trent.
THE ACHILLES HEAL OF AN APOSTASY
This formal recognition of the NT Cannon is the problem for believers.
If the Church was in error in the proposed range (100ad-312ad), then how could the errant church be trusted to be correct about the cannon of Scripture? How can one say for certainty that the cannon is correct. Maybe the Didichae belongs in there?
It's an error in logic, a paradox, to say that "An errant Church, misguided and corrupt, produced an infallible cannon of Scripture which is the foundation of the faith for non-Catholic believers."
While it is true that an errant church can teach valid truths, it is not true that an errant church can define the entire faith on which these truths rest.
CONCLUSION
A common reaction to the question of the cannon of the NT is that the Holy Spirit has confirmed it to individuals and the Church. If the Spirit indeed does confirm that the NT cannon is correct, then one has to admit that the either an apostate Church produced an infallible NT cannon (a contradiction) OR, that in fact, the Church wasn't apostate after all.
To reasonable people, the conclusion "that in fact, the church wasn't apostate after all or if it was then the NT cannon and the faith as well is in serious doubt", is inescapable.
-----
Comments??
Members of your cult keep spouting this LIE. Your cult denies Jesus divinity by dragging Him down and elevating mere humans. I've heard no end of "Moses was a 'type of Christ'" yet the Bible only mentions ONE Christ: Jesus.
Mary was a normal sinful human being who needs a Savior like the rest of us, there is NO Biblical basis for any other view of her.
How is it that someone so central to your cult as Mary only is mentioned in 4 or 5 events and completely disappears from the Bible after ACTS 1:14. Not even Peter mentions her.
It would even be more accurate to say Baptist thought especially looks to AD 312 as the time the RC Church started to be corrupted(note I didn't digitally, black and white, say "it was apostate") due to its allegiance with the government--baptists have always been suspicious of a state church.
The classic Protestant view is yes the Church started to grow towards being apostate from about Emporer Constantine on, but that it never fully became that way. The name "REFORMATION" after all comes from the Reformers view that things needed reform--they never called themselves "New Founders" or something else, indicating that they thought the RC Church was hoplessly in error--Mormon's I believe said that about all Christians, which is why they founded an entirely new religion. The formation of the Cannon occurred before Constantine, and can easily be seen (as the scholars did then) as a mere recognition of what was already regarded as inspired and authoritative, rather than the creation of that... The creation of the New Testament after all was done from the pen of the Apostles... (and the breath of the Holy Spirit).
Another thing, you state the early church had no Cannon, which is incorrect--they had the Old Testament, the cannonicity which had been recognized by the Jews already (minus the appocrypha I might add), so yes they did have the largest part of the Cannon in that.
The logic that the New Testament is a creation of the Church--thereby proving the authority of the (Roman) Church over it, is flawed. The New Testament, created by eyewitnesses to the Ressurection--the Apostles--was RECOGNIZED by the Roman Church; there's a big difference between recognition and creation. And orthodox Protestants of all stripes, Calvinist, or not, have never taught the Roman Church was (fully) appostate, only that the encrustation of centuries of extra-biblical practice, teachings and tradition, had distorted the good news of salvation by grace alone through simple faith in Christ.
Nothing unusual, I laugh at a lot of your "serious" posts. I don't think it amuses God even a little however, IMO.
Dan
EXODUS 20:4 Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness [of any thing] that [is] in heaven above, or that [is] in the earth beneath, or that [is] in the water under the earth:
EXODUS 20:5 Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God [am] a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth [generation] of them that hate me;
No, God did not ban art work, the difference between a statue and an idol is in how it used and treated. When someone is bowing down to them and praying to them as J2P2 is CLEARLY doing in the pictures in post 426 that is clearly idolatry.
2131 Basing itself on the mystery of the incarnate Word, the seventh ecumenical council at Nicaea (787) justified against the iconoclasts the veneration of icons - of Christ, but also of the Mother of God, the angels, and all the saints. By becoming incarnate, the Son of God introduced a new "economy" of images.
It took rome 7 and a half centuries to openly officialize idolatry, why is there nothing in the Bible that gives any information concerning this alleged "new economy" of images? As a matter of fact Paul was nearly murdered in Ephesus by the idol makers because they realized the spread of the Gospel meant the end of their livelyhood.
2132 The Christian veneration of images is not contrary to the first commandment which proscribes idols. Indeed, "the honor rendered to an image passes to its prototype," and "whoever venerates an image venerates the person portrayed in it." The honor paid to sacred images is a "respectful veneration," not the adoration due to God alone:
Your catechism clearly indicates the purpose is to create a spiritual connection, i.e. idolatry as well as in terms of Mary or other "saints" necromancy which is also forbidden.
869. "The Church is apostolic. She is built on a lasting foundation: 'the twelve APOSTLES of the Lamb' [Rev 21:14.]. She is indestructible (cf. Mt 16:18). She is upheld infallibly in the truth: Christ governs her through Peter and the other APOSTLES, who are PRESENT in their successors, the Pope and the college of bishops."
ACTS 16:16 ¶ And it came to pass, as we went to prayer, a certain damsel possessed with a spirit of divination met us, which brought her masters much gain by soothsaying:
ACTS 16:17 The same followed Paul and us, and cried, saying, These men are the servants of the most high God, which shew unto us the way of salvation.
ACTS 16:18 And this did she many days. But Paul, being grieved, turned and said to the spirit, I command thee in the name of Jesus Christ to come out of her. And he came out the same hour.
2141 The veneration of sacred images is based on the mystery of the Incarnation of the Word of God. It is not contrary to the first commandment.
No matter how often a false doctrine is repeated it is STILL false.
You insisted on an absolute ban of graven images, but we know that the Jews did not adopt such a standard in temple worship. The Arks was adorned with images and so was the temple. You have proposed a standrd that is more Muslim than Christian. Basically We are dealing here with a difference of interpretation. . In YOUR mind it is idolatry because you think that we are adoring the statues. In OUR mind, however, we are doing the equivalent of setting a wreath before a tomb and bowing the head. But you refuse to believe this. Do you insist that we must believe what a pagan would believe if he were to do the same thing?
It took rome 7 and a half centuries to openly officialize idolatry, why is there nothing in the Bible that gives any information concerning this alleged "new economy" of images?
Christian icons began to be displayed in the 4th century when churches became public buildings and in Christian tombs long before this. If you read the history of the Second Council of Nicaea, you will learn that the matter came up only after a new Roman dynasty adopted your Jewish/Muslim doctrine.
As a matter of fact Paul was nearly murdered in Ephesus by the idol makers because they realized the spread of the Gospel meant the end of their livelyhood.
So? What has this to do with Christian veneration of images? These were images of pagan gods.
2132 The Christian veneration of images is not contrary to the first commandment which proscribes idols. Indeed, "the honor rendered to an image passes to its prototype," and "whoever venerates an image venerates the person portrayed in it." The honor paid to sacred images is a "respectful veneration," not the adoration due to God alone:
Yes, we think of images the way that radical protestants think of the bread and wine in the Eucharist, as MERE symbols of an absent spiritual power.
Your catechism clearly indicates the purpose is to create a spiritual connection, i.e. idolatry as well as in terms of Mary or other "saints"
The basic difference here is that you think that the dead are dead.But the Scripture never speaks of them as dead but asleep. You interpret this to mean that they are indifferent to us or unable to hear us.
869. "The Church is apostolic. She is built on a lasting foundation: 'the twelve APOSTLES of the Lamb' [Rev 21:14.]. She is indestructible (cf. Mt 16:18). She is upheld infallibly in the truth: Christ governs her through Peter and the other APOSTLES, who are PRESENT in their successors, the Pope and the college of bishops."
And? Your point? Do you really think that we believe that John Paul II is possessed by the spirit of Peter? Then you are nuts.
ACTS 16:16 ¶ And it came to pass, as we went to prayer, a certain damsel possessed with a spirit of divination met us, which brought her masters much gain by soothsaying: ACTS 16:17 The same followed Paul and us, and cried, saying, These men are the servants of the most high God, which shew unto us the way of salvation. ACTS 16:18 And this did she many days. But Paul, being grieved, turned and said to the spirit, I command thee in the name of Jesus Christ to come out of her. And he came out the same hour.
When we pray to the saints we are not trying to conjour up their spirits. We are simply asking of them what we ask of of our brethren in the congregation. Pray for us. Do you you not think that they are with God, and if so that their prayers not be more powerful than our own? We invoike their help for the same reason we invoke the help of highly place persons in goivernment.
When we talk to the saints, we do not expect them to answer us, anymore than we expect our beloved dead to answer us when we talk to them at the gravesite.
2141 The veneration of sacred images is based on the mystery of the Incarnation of the Word of God. It is not contrary to the first commandment.
No matter how often a false doctrine is repeated it is STILL false.
Well, we agree on this. Luther was wrong, Calvin was wrong and you are wrong.
Are you claiming God contradicted himself?
NUMBERS 21:4 ¶ And they journeyed from mount Hor by the way of the Red sea, to compass the land of Edom: and the soul of the people was much discouraged because of the way.
NUMBERS 21:5 And the people spake against God, and against Moses, Wherefore have ye brought us up out of Egypt to die in the wilderness? for [there is] no bread, neither [is there any] water; and our soul loatheth this light bread.
NUMBERS 21:6 And the LORD sent fiery serpents among the people, and they bit the people; and much people of Israel died.
NUMBERS 21:7 Therefore the people came to Moses, and said, We have sinned, for we have spoken against the LORD, and against thee; pray unto the LORD, that he take away the serpents from us. And Moses prayed for the people.
NUMBERS 21:8 And the LORD said unto Moses, Make thee a fiery serpent, and set it upon a pole: and it shall come to pass, that every one that is bitten, when he looketh upon it, shall live.
NUMBERS 21:9 And Moses made a serpent of brass, and put it upon a pole, and it came to pass, that if a serpent had bitten any man, when he beheld the serpent of brass, he lived.
II KINGS 18:1 ¶ Now it came to pass in the third year of Hoshea son of Elah king of Israel, [that] Hezekiah the son of Ahaz king of Judah began to reign.
II KINGS 18:2 Twenty and five years old was he when he began to reign; and he reigned twenty and nine years in Jerusalem. His mother's name also [was] Abi, the daughter of Zachariah.
II KINGS 18:3 And he did [that which was] right in the sight of the LORD, according to all that David his father did.
II KINGS 18:4 He removed the high places, and brake the images, and cut down the groves, and brake in pieces the brasen serpent that Moses had made: for unto those days the children of Israel did burn incense to it: and he called it Nehushtan.
II KINGS 18:5 He trusted in the LORD God of Israel; so that after him was none like him among all the kings of Judah, nor [any] that were before him.
II KINGS 18:6 For he clave to the LORD, [and] departed not from following him, but kept his commandments, which the LORD commanded Moses.
Let me e-x-p-l-a-i-n s-l-o-w-l-y in NUMBERS 21:4-9 God says make a brass serpent and do what? [{ LOOK at it }], nothing more, nothing less.
In II KINGS 18:1-6 same brass serpent, but now people are doing what? [{ Burning incense to it }] gee would that be a form of "veneration"?
Christian icons began to be displayed in the 4th century when churches became public buildings and in Christian tombs long before this. If you read the history of the Second Council of Nicaea, you will learn that the matter came up only after a new Roman dynasty adopted your Jewish/Muslim doctrine.
What happened it the 4th century was that romes' pagan religious leaders saw the writing on the wall. Over 3 centuries of roman butchery only caused the spread of the Christianity, therefore in 352 A.D. the roman emporer constantine invited the Christian Churches that rome had not been able to wipe out to send representatives to form a church council in rome. Only those willing to betray the Gospel in order to save their own lives joined constantine, your first pope. Many of the pagan temples were redecorated, but kept their same idols called by different names, the first crop of "catholic saints".
869. "The Church is apostolic. She is built on a lasting foundation: 'the twelve APOSTLES of the Lamb' [Rev 21:14.]. She is indestructible (cf. Mt 16:18). She is upheld infallibly in the truth: Christ governs her through Peter and the other APOSTLES, who are PRESENT in their successors, the Pope and the college of bishops."
And? Your point? Do you really think that we believe that John Paul II is possessed by the spirit of Peter? Then you are nuts.
Excuse me? That is what YOUR catechism states. It is bad enough that you reject Biblical authority, now you're rejecting catechism too.
When we pray to the saints we are not trying to conjour up their spirits. We are simply asking of them what we ask of of our brethren in the congregation. Pray for us. Do you you not think that they are with God, and if so that their prayers not be more powerful than our own? We invoike their help for the same reason we invoke the help of highly place persons in goivernment.
When we talk to the saints, we do not expect them to answer us, anymore than we expect our beloved dead to answer us when we talk to them at the gravesite.
I TIMOTHY 2:1 ¶ I exhort therefore, that, first of all, supplications, prayers, intercessions, [and] giving of thanks, be made for all men;
I TIMOTHY 2:2 For kings, and [for] all that are in authority; that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty.
I TIMOTHY 2:3 For this [is] good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour;
I TIMOTHY 2:4 Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth.
I TIMOTHY 2:5 For [there is] one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;
I TIMOTHY 2:6 Who gave himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time.
I TIMOTHY 2:7 Whereunto I am ordained a preacher, and an apostle, (I speak the truth in Christ, [and] lie not;) a teacher of the Gentiles in faith and verity.
I TIMOTHY 2:8 I will therefore that men pray every where, lifting up holy hands, without wrath and doubting.
JOHN 14:6 Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.
Excuse me? That is what YOUR catechism states. It is bad enough that you reject Biblical authority, now you're rejecting catechism too.
You DO think that this says that the pope is possessed by Peter! No. Only the authority of Peter and the Apostles has been passed on to the pope and the other bishops. Peter and the other guys are taking their ease in heaven, up in the skyboxes, so to speak. When Paul VI said "I am Peter," he was speaking only figuratively, somewhat as DeGaulle said "I am France." (not quite as sure in the latter case)
Oh, so it's a private interpretation of an extrapolation based on hearsay regarding a verse of Scripture.
I repeat my question: Why should I prefer Your view over that of a Christian of the 2nd century, when you and he are reading the same Scripture?
Mine (and it is shared by millions of other Christians - so it is not really mine), is based on what the Scripture actually says, his is .... see above.
through Peter and the other APOSTLES, who are PRESENT in their successors, the Pope and the college of bishops.
through-By the means or agency of:
Peter
and-Together with or along with; in addition to; as well as
the-Used before singular or plural nouns and noun phrases that denote particular, specified persons or thing
other-different from that or those implied or specified
APOSTLES-One of a group made up especially of the 12 disciples chosen by Jesus to preach the gospel
who-What or which person or persons
are-Second person singular and plural and first and third person plural present indicative of be
PRESENT-Being at hand or in attendance. Existing in something specified.
in-Located inside; inner
their-The possessive form of they
successors,-One that succeeds another
the-Used before singular or plural nouns and noun phrases that denote particular, specified persons or things:
pope-The bishop of rome and head of the roman catholic church
and-Together with or along with; in addition to; as well as
the-Used before singular or plural nouns and noun phrases that denote particular, specified persons or things:
college-A body of persons having a common purpose or shared duties
of-Derived or coming from; originating at or from
bishops-A high-ranking Christian cleric, in modern churches usually in charge of a diocese and in some churches regarded as having received the highest ordination in unbroken succession from the apostles
This is what the dictionary says these words mean. Are you now not only Anti-Bible and anti-catechism, but Anti-Dictionary as well?
REALLY? Why then is there NO MENTION WHATSOEVER in Acts or any of the Epistles of ANY images of Jesus being made? C'mon the Apostles actually SAW Jesus, if He had intended them to make idols of Him He would have said so or they would have recorded that they did.
2132 The Christian veneration of images is not contrary to the first commandment which proscribes idols. Indeed, "the honor rendered
A while back someone said "I DID NOT have sex with that woman......"
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.