Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

To: HarleyD

You wrote:

“I see this phrase pop up from time to time in different forms. It bothers me.”

What bothers you is of no importance and certainly doesn’t rise to the level of a theological point.

“First, the early church fathers knew that man could NEVER write anything as perfect and infallible as the scriptures so much that they separated their writings from the Bible.”

What? 1) They didn’t separate their writings from the Bible. They simply assumed, correctly, that their writings were not inspired. Others did sometimes assume some of their writings were inspired. At least one list of canonical scriptures included 1 Clement if I am not mistaken. That’s another reason why the Church had to decide on a conclusive list of scripture.

“Second, it presumes that God “left out something” that requires us to go stumbling around in the dark since we are unable to perfectly divine God’s will.”

Uh, no. It presumes nothing like that. It presumes, correctly, that God never intended scripture to include everything. Where is there an inspired table of contents, for instance?

“Everything in scripture is given for our edification and training. We don’t need more than what God has given to us.”

Whoa! Nice slight of hand there, buddy! So, if something isn’t in the bible it isn’t from God? Again, how did we get the canon that we have? Where is it in the Bible? While you’re failing to answer that question while don’t you fail to answer these: Where in scripture does it say that St. Matthew wrote the gospel named after him? Where in scripture does it say that Matthew’s gospel is inspired? Now, since those answers are no where in scripture, tell me how you know the answers to them.

“It is reckless presumption on our part to tell God that we are capable of writing theology that He never intended.”

Whoa! Another leap there. Abortion. Where is it in the Bible? Nowhere. So, if someone writes out why abortion is wrong according to a Christian understanding of God’s creation and the dignity of the person of man, it’s “theology He never intended”?

“The early church fathers never made this mistake.”

They wrote against abortion.

I don’t think you have any idea of what you’re talking about.


97 posted on 01/02/2010 5:16:19 AM PST by vladimir998 (Part of the Vast Catholic Conspiracy (hat tip to Kells))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies ]


To: vladimir998; HarleyD; the_conscience

“What bothers you is of no importance...”

Feel the love!

“Whoa! Nice slight of hand there, buddy! So, if something isn’t in the bible it isn’t from God? Again, how did we get the canon that we have? Where is it in the Bible? While you’re failing to answer that question while don’t you fail to answer these: Where in scripture does it say that St. Matthew wrote the gospel named after him? Where in scripture does it say that Matthew’s gospel is inspired? Now, since those answers are no where in scripture, tell me how you know the answers to them.”

OK, let’s go thru you list of infantile arguments...

1) “So, if something isn’t in the bible it isn’t from God?”

Scripture says there is a form of revelation given to all. However, all that we need for salvation and holy living is found in scripture. “15and how from infancy you have known the holy Scriptures, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus. 16All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, 17so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work.”

Scripture is able to make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus. Therefor, it must have what we need to know for salvation, otherwise it would have to say scripture and the teachings of the church are able...

Further, if a man of God uses scripture to teach, rebuke, correct and train, the result is another man of God who is thoroughly equipped for every good work. One cannot be thoroughly equipped for every good work if something (Purgatory, Priests, Indulgences, Mariology) is missing.

2) What establishes the Canon? Well, any denomination can decide what it accepts, and they do. “Canon” refers to what a group of people consider to be scripture. Mormons and Jews obviously have a different canon than Christians. Among Christians, there are minor differences between Orthodox & Catholics, while Protestants rejected the Apocrypha - as did many Catholics prior to Trent (c 1550), since many Catholics taught as some Orthodox do - that the Apocrypha is NOT useful for “teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness”.

In the end, scripture must be self-authenticating. If I don’t believe something is scripture, then I won’t believe a church that claims it is, such as the Mormon Church. A canon list is like a constitution - it defines church belief, but it doesn’t force anyone else to accept it.

3) “Where in scripture does it say that St. Matthew wrote the gospel named after him?”

It doesn’t. You can believe Matthew was written by Barnabas, and it makes no impact. And if most folks thought it was written by Barnabas, it would be called “The Gospel According to Barnabas”.

4) “Where in scripture does it say that Matthew’s gospel is inspired?”

It doesn’t. You either believe it, or you do not. No one can stop you from calling yourself a christian, no matter what you believe. Mormons call themselves christians, but they draw their beliefs from the Book of Mormon and others.

Do you accept the Book of Mormon on the authority of the LDS Church? I suspect not - but why not? Perhaps you reject it because the Catholic Church tells you to. I reject it because it conflicts with scripture I do accept.

The whole ‘who wrote the canon’ argument is stupid. It only transfer the question of authority from “Do you trust this as scripture?” to “Do you trust this is the true Church?” accept or reject one, and the other will follow.

You wrote the_conscience, “This is one of those things where it is so obvious that, if someone doesn’t get it, then he just doesn’t have what it takes to get it.”

Got it...you don’t know.

You wrote to me, “What you need to stop doing is claiming that evil is the common good.”

Of course, what I said was that evil men decide that evil is the ‘common good’, and cause their organizations - including government and states - to seek it. China uses abortion and sterilization for ‘the common good’. They oppose Christians who say it is evil.

You write, ““Maybe because they exist - as in, “None is righteous, no, not one; no one understands; no one seeks for God”” / That was written to believers. St. Paul was writing to Roman Christians, not non-Christians. You’re merely proving my point.”

In writing to Christians, Paul explains what our state is prior to being born again. Your had argued some scriptures show men have a built in compulsion to seek God, while I said they did not. I pointed out the scriptures you cited discuss men who were believers, while scripture discussing fallen man explicitly teaches that no one seeks God.


99 posted on 01/02/2010 7:21:39 AM PST by Mr Rogers (I loathe the ground he slithers on!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 97 | View Replies ]

To: vladimir998
What bothers you is of no importance

True. But God takes a very dim view to those who modify what He has said.

What? 1) They didn’t separate their writings from the Bible. They simply assumed, correctly, that their writings were not inspired.

Isn't that what I said? The scriptures are inspired. All other writings are subject to error.

At least one list of canonical scriptures included 1 Clement if I am not mistaken.

Not according to the Jewish Christians and the early church fathers. I doubt if Clement would have said his writings were to the same level as Paul, John, or James.

Whoa! Nice slight of hand there, buddy! So, if something isn’t in the bible it isn’t from God?

That's not what I stated. I said what is in the scripture is given for our edification and training. These aren't my words but Paul's:

Now given this list, what more can Catholic Canons add?

Where in scripture does it say that St. Matthew wrote the gospel named after him? Where in scripture does it say that Matthew’s gospel is inspired?

The Jewish and early church fathers stated it. They knew what was inspired and what wasn't. We have already established the fact that everything else is NOT inspired-including what comes from Roman. At least to the same degree as the scriptures. The infallible word of God is closed forever. Nothing else is infallible.

Whoa! Another leap there. Abortion. Where is it in the Bible? Nowhere.

On the contrary, we are instructed not to murder. Abortion is murder. People know it's murder; they just try to ease their conscience by calling a baby a "fetus". It's that simple though we would like to make it complicated. As Paul states, every answer for us to live a righteous life is found in scripture.

I don’t think you have any idea of what you’re talking about.

I don't pretend to understand everything in God's word but I know that it is true and is all that I need. Other works are helpful but not inspired. And I don't need a Christian organization to tell me what is written when I can read it for myself.

102 posted on 01/02/2010 8:55:31 AM PST by HarleyD
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 97 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson