Posted on 05/04/2011 10:56:18 AM PDT by Alex Murphy
>http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/03267a.htm<
St. Augustine employs protos and deuteros without any discrimination whatsoever. Moreover in his “De Doctrinâ Christianâ” he enumerates the components of the complete Old Testament. The Synod of Hippo (393) and the three of Carthage (393, 397, and 419), in which, doubtless, Augustine was the leadingspirit, found it necessary to deal explicitly with the question of the Canon, and drew up identical lists from which no sacred books are excluded.
No where is that canon give to Rome to play with .... Trent had no right to change the Covenant God made with the Jews for its own purposes..
Trent was long after an official council determined the INSPIRED canon to the Jews..
Show me in scripture where God moved the authority of the jews over the OT to the Christian church .
Are you aware that up until Trent, Rome had no official canon? Different provinces used different canons in the early church. At that time Rome officially added to the OT canon of the Jews
Even some Roman Catholic scholars through the Reformation made the distinction between the Apocrypha and the canon (Cardinal Ximenes in Complutensian Polyglot, 1514; Cardinal Cajetan, 1532,
The Apocrypha itself never claims to be the Word of God. What right does Rome have to declare it?
The early church showed no unanimous support for these works, Some used it and some did not.. These works were opposed by
Athanasius, Cyril of Jerusalem, Origen, and Jerome ...Fathers catholics are quick to quote as if they were infallible.. I guess they were only infallible when they agree with them
You still haven't provided a quote from Augustine saying that they are not inspired. He said no such thing. You aren't making things up about the Church, are you?
Also, the councils of Carthage say no such thing. They do name specifically those scriptures in the canon, and it includes those under discussion.
Have you ever REALLY read them ?
Of course. I'm Catholic.
Have you noticed the inconsistencies and errors??
There are doubters who make the same claims about the scriptures held canonical by the Protestants. It's not a very persuasive one.
“The Apocrypha itself never claims to be the Word of God.”
What a ridiculous criteria!
How many books of the Bible would be excluded if THAT were the standard?
And what of the fraudulent N.T. editing by Luther?
Protestants certainly have no “unanimous support” for much, considering the 13,000 denominations. Private, yet, conflicting revelation is NOT very convincing.
“The early church showed no unanimous support...”
“Unanimous support” is NOT the criteria!
The Synod of Hippo (393) and the three of Carthage (393, 397, and 419), are quite sufficient!
And what council would that have been and was it universally accepted by all that you call Jews?
It appears that YOPIS includes the power to establish canon for yourself. If nothing else it refutes your denial of free will.
What these Protestants do not grasp is that the Church is the context of the Bible whereas the Bible is the context of the Protestant churches because the Church gave us the bible. Without the authority of the Church and it's canon the Bible in an errant collection of inerrant works.
Well then with discernment you should see the mistakes and inconsistency in them
There are doubters who make the same claims about the scriptures held canonical by the Protestants. It's not a very persuasive one.
Do you know who is credited with the authorship of Maccabees? Do you know when it was penned?
Did Gregory THE GREAT accept them 600 years after Christ ?
Please pick up your bible ..go to Maccabees I 8:16 Look to read the account of Antiochus
Now go to Maccabees 2 1 :16 and read the account of Antiochus there and then go to Maccabees 2 :10 and read the account of the account of Antiochus there
Which is the Holy Spirit inspired account??
In Maccabees 1 9:3 read the account of the death of Judas..
Now read Maccabees 2 1:10 where he writes a letter 33 years after his death
In Macc1 4:36 it says Judas judas purified the temple before the death of Antiochus
Yet in Mac 2;10 it says this purification it says this happened AFTER the death of Antiochus
So which was it??
Perhaps the most telling is that at the end of the book the author begs the forgiveness of the readers which places this in the human history end of the library because the holy Spirit only writes the truth and never needs to apologize for His work.
Perhaps that is why the author tells us there were no prophets in the land.. because Inspired scripture is written by prophets..
It would be interesting to see you put that test to each of the books in the Protestant canon.
These works were opposed by Athanasius, Cyril of Jerusalem, Origen, and Jerome
That is not true. For example, see these quotes from Athanasius, Cyril and Origen. Jerome did have some problem with them, but then submitted to Church teaching.
Fathers catholics are quick to quote as if they were infallible.. I guess they were only infallible when they agree with them
The Church does not teach that they are infallible. Don't try to pass it off as Church teaching because it is not true and it does not bolster your case.
No the scriptures were recognized long before Rome ... If in fact Rome had given us the "bible" it is interesting that there is no mention of a pope, priests, mass, praying to saints vestments,etc..?
It was almost 400 years after Christ that the church sought to develop some kind unity in the canon by drawing together the various texts that were being used in the churches . The church in 400 was very different than Rome today ..there were no crucifies and no such thing as prayer to Saints
Even then the early councils were not ecumenical they were local
As early as 200 there was a collection of scriptures that men used . Origen, born at names all the books of both the Old and New Testaments.
It might make Rome "feel good" to claim authority of the scriptures that they now disregard in their teachings.. but the Author and keeper of the scriptures is the Holy Spirit of God..
That's the same argument made by atheists against the Bible.
Do you know who is credited with the authorship of Maccabees? Do you know when it was penned?
Let's see you answer that for each book in your Bible. Try, and you'll see what a ridiculous accusation you are making.
It looks like you are scrambling to make any argument you can against them. Atheist go to great extremes to point out inconsitencies in the Bible making the same arguments you are presenting, but about the Protestant canon.
They do all "test" ..all of them are Christocentric..not so for the pretenders
That is not true. For example, see these quotes from Athanasius, Cyril and Origen. Jerome did have some problem with them, but then submitted to Church teaching.
LOL so that makes them true? Mormons submit to the book of Mormon does that make it true ? Muslims submit to the koran ..does that make it true?
hey listen friend most of the arguments I read hear from Catholics are from the church fathers .. they sure act like they are infallible
These are huge errors ..not errors in copy ...One man does not die 3 different times 3 different ways ...These are the works of men.. not God..but that fits well with Rome ....it is all about the works of men
Catholic myth.. Luther never removed anything from the bible.. whereas Rome added to it ignoring the warning of God
That isn't the test you proposed. You claimed "The Apocrypha itself never claims to be the Word of God." I asked that you demonstrate the same for each book in your canon. You haven't, and it is noted that you now do a switch and bait. Less than clever, but C+ in effort.
LOL so that makes them true?
No, it just proves your claims wrong about Athanasius, Cyril and Origen. But I can understand why you would want to divert to something else.
hey listen friend most of the arguments I read hear from Catholics are from the church fathers .. they sure act like they are infallible
I don't care about your opinion. Just do not try to pass it off as Church teaching. Also, just so you're clear, I'm not your friend. I don't know you any better than any of the anonymous, bitter, Calvinist deceivers who post here.
These are same claims of atheists. They do not impress.
These are the works of men.. not God
Your opinions mean nothing to the Church.
but that fits well with Rome ....it is all about the works of men
Resorting to attacks demostrates you've run out of reasoned arguments.
“edit” = to add, subtract, or otherwise modify.
It is well known that Luther in his German translation of the Bible falsified Romans 3:28, by interpolating the word “alone” (by faith alone),
Yep
Thanks and noted.
The Jewish canon of the OT says Just says the Lord in 420 passages
Just show me Christ in ANY of the apocrypha... where it contends it is the inspired word of God ..where is the “thus says the Lord” in them? Where do they tell you this is the word of the Lord.. being Catholic I am sure you know this right?
It is interesting that the book of 2 Maccabees, tells of Nehemiah “founded a library and collected books about the kings and prophets, and the writings of David, and letters of kings about votive offerings” (2:13–15).
One of those Books Deuteronomy warns the reader about adding to these books..
That's great. I've not heard of this test being required to demonstrate canonicity. Show me where it says this in every "book" of your OT canon and every book of your NT canon.
Just show me Christ in ANY of the apocrypha... where it contends it is the inspired word of God ..where is the “thus says the Lord” in them?
First, prove that this is a criteria required for determining what belongs in the canon. Then demonstrate that every book in your Bible qualifies using this criterion. Once you demonstrate both of these, then you may have a case.
It is interesting that the book of 2 Maccabees, tells of Nehemiah “founded a library and collected books about the kings and prophets, and the writings of David, and letters of kings about votive offerings” (2:13–15).
Did you have a point?
One of those Books Deuteronomy warns the reader about adding to these books..
Does your Bible have no books after Deuteronomy? Does this warning apply to Luther for adding the word "alone"?
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.