I believe that the Canon of Scripture as shown in Protestant Bibles is the correct Canon.
Ok for you the Protestant Bible is God's canon. Catholics differ; hence, I'm naming them Catholic and Protestant canon in order to communicate.
By faith, I believe that the Canon of Scripture as shown in Protestant Bibles is the correct Canon.
So part of faith to you is faith in the Protestant canon as correct.
I do this based upon specific scriptural statements concerning God, salvation, life after death, etc. and knowing that God will not contradict Himself.
But this is different. If I'm understanding you, this is saying it's NOT taken solely on faith but upon an examination of the contents of possible books measured against the theology/teachings that you take on faith?
This would get back to my 3) before. Is every Christian then to revisit the history and translations, in light of their faith, to determine for themselves that the Protestant canon is God's canon? Or do they take it on faith when they join their respective churches, or on authority of those churches?
Thanks for your reply.
Faith is not blind faith, though many people's faith is blind. God has given us His Scripture and His Spirit in order to rightly interpret Scripture. He does this for EVERY believer, but not every believer takes advantage of it. In terms of the Canon, that some people accept by blind faith is evident. I think all of us did at first. However, our faith is affirmed when we read Scripture and see what IT TESTIFIES OF ITSELF. We believe the Words of Christ, Paul, Peter, James, Daniel, Moses, and all of the rest by Faith. We believe the Holy Spirit teaches by faith. We do not claim HUMAN infallibility but led the men of God who wrote Scripture in producing His Canon. It's God's Canon, not mans. Had there never been a council, there would still be a canon. If we don't believe it, there is still a canon. The Canon doesn't depend upon Man's affirmation of it. It is, since it is the written Word of God given by the plenary verbal inspiration of God. Regardless if I think Book X belongs in the Canon doesn't make it canonical or non-canonical. What makes it canonical is God's opinion of it. By faith, and by the affirmation of the Holy Spirit, I believe that when I pick up a Bible (Protestant for communication sake) I am reading Scripture. I do not do this blindly, for I have spent a lifetime becoming familiar with Scripture. When I see something that contradicts it, the red flag starts waving everywhere. But even at that I don't believe I have attained a Scriptural knowledge just by applying myself. Scripture says that the things of the Spirit are Spiritually discerned. I would be nowhere without the leadership of the Holy Spirit.
That is the best I can do at explaining why I believe that God established his Canon and believe that by faith.
Now, why do you believe that the Canon of Scripture did not exist until a group of Roman Catholic scholars got together in some council someplace declared what it was? Or, do you too believe that it existed as God inspired it and man's recognition of it makes no difference as far as canonicity? In other words, is your diagram
God---->Truth----->Scripture---->Man
or
Miscellaneous manuscripts containing truth claims----> Human intervention ---->Scripture?
And, if that is offensive to you (it is not meant to be), then at least admit this - you accept what you accept as Scripture by faith in the councils being led of God
I accept what I believe to be Scripture based upon faith in God's accessibility and willingness to reveal Himself (including His Word) to every believer regardless where they are and what their educational level is. My faith is affirmed by the portions of Scripture that I noted - which I believe are Scripture themselves, by faith.