Posted on 11/06/2011 4:29:37 AM PST by markomalley
Wasn’t the Book of Revelation considered a “deuterocanonical” work at one time?
“Mormons, Baptists and others teach the Church went “apostate” in the 2nd century and needed to be “restored”, they only differ whether the “restoration” took place in the 16th or 19th century.”
Actually, I’ve said that large parts of the visible church went astray, particularly in theology, but that God still saved those who responded to Him.
It was called the “Reformation”, not the “Restoration”. By Baptists and by Protestants.
“they didn’t need to publish authoritative lists, they published the Bible.”
Well, not in the vernacular, and not with the intent for commoners to read it. As you well know, the Catholic Church took a pretty strong stance AGAINST commoners reading scripture, from about 1200-1800 AD.
“the 73 books in it were Scripture, the books not in it weren’t Scripture.”
Nope. Not according to the Roman Catholic Church. That is why the term “deuterocanonicals” needed to be invented in 1566. The Old Vulgate had 3 books that didn’t make the cut in the Council of Trent - probably just a mistake on the part of the infallible council - so the revised Vulgate was published with those 3 separate, and they later were dropped.
But what to call the Apocrypha minus those 3? Thus “deuterocanonicals” - coined in 1566.
“who has the authority to say infallibly this is the correct cannon of Scripture?”
God. And each individual will answer for listening, or not.
“Wasn’t the Book of Revelation considered a “deuterocanonical” work at one time?”
Sort of. It was on the lists made around 400 AD in Africa, but not all congregations accepted it.
“While the ideas of a canon became more clear, only the core described previously was certain. Revelation in particular was attacked by many because Montanism had made apocalyptic material suspect. Gaius of Rome, an early third century churchman, attacked the inclusion of the Gospel of St. John, Hebrews, and Revelation on anti-Montanist grounds (he ascribed St. John’s Gospel and Revelation to Cerinthus, a Gnostic heretic who was a contemporary of St. John).(40) In general, however, apocalyptic material, while treated with caution, was not considered as suspect in the West as in the East. The Shepherd was dropped from the Western canon; the Revelation of Peter and the Revelation of John were both challenged. However, in the East (the Greek speaking parts of the world and Egypt), there was nearly universal refusal to allow apocalyptic writings into the canon until Western influence began to sway the Eastern Christians in the fourth century. Moreover, Hebrews was rejected in the West because it was used by the Montanists to justify their harsh penetential system and because the West was not certain of its authorship. Hebrews was not accepted in the West until the fourth century under the influence of St. Athanasius.”
“The canon of the Syriac-speaking churches in the third century included the Diatessaron and the fourteen Pauline epistles. In the early fifth century, the Peshitta became the official text of Syriac-speaking churches. It replaced the Diatessaron with the four gospels. It contained the 22 books of our New Testament other than II Peter, II John, III John, Jude, and Revelation. (The Peshitta is traditionally held to be the work of Rabulla, bishop of Edessa from 412-435. However, it probably built on work of the previous century.) The Nestorian church still uses this 22 book canon. In 508, the Jacobite branch of the Syriac church came to accept the standard 27 book canon.”
“Thus, we see that producing the final form of the New Testament canon took a considerable period of time. It took still longer to produce near universal agreement. However, to this day, there exist ancient churches which have either never accepted certain books or which accept more than 27 books. The canon in its present form was not a self-evident fact, but the result of a prolonged struggle-we reap the fruits of other men’s labors.”
http://orthodoxinfo.com/inquirers/ntcanon_emergence.aspx
So God told you personally that the Book of Revelation is Scripture?
If so, I’m impressed.
Has God sent me a list, possibly by email? No.
Does the Holy Spirit speak to me when I read Revelations? Not a lot, really, but enough for me to be content with it on the list.
Does the Holy Spirit speak to me as I read the Shepherd of Hermas, or the Epistle of Barnabas? Nope - other than to tell me it is NOT the word of God.
In like manner, when I read the Apocrypha, it is empty of God’s Spirit.
Add in that the vast majority of the christian church has accepted most of the NT almost as soon as it was penned, and all of the OT, and I am comfortable facing God’s judgement in the matter - for all of us will be judged as individuals.
Please also remember that a great many Catholic scholars said all along that the Apocrypha was good for reading, but not for doctrine, and I’ll have a lot of company in rejecting the Apocrypha as authoritative.
And to the best of my knowledge, there are only a couple verses in the entire Apocrypha used for doctrine by Roman Catholics.
“its antiquity does not guarantee that it is truly apostolic or teaches the correct doctrine”
Yes! Here’s an important consideration to recognize. It’s like the supposed “oldest manuscripts” of the Bible; That’s a false assumption, because the manuscripts that were written on parchment outlasted the earliest ones, which were written on papyrus or paper. So the earliest ones are the later ones.
I might add that scripture cites genuine apocryphal writings. Namely the Book of Enoch and the Assumption of Moses in the book of Jude.
Perhaps Jude is apocryphal too.
I might add that scripture cites genuine apocryphal writings. Namely the Book of Enoch and the Assumption of Moses in the book of Jude.
Perhaps Jude is apocryphal too.
Paul also cited a Cretan prophet in Titus, IIRC, but he did not do so for authority.
“It is written” appears many times in the New Testament, but never with the Apocrypha.
“But... surely you realize that this is a mere appeal to raw emotion and personal taste?”
Actually, it is an appeal to the guidance of the Holy Spirit. “26But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, he will teach you all things and bring to your remembrance all that I have said to you.”
Neither Philemon nor Revelations is my favorite book of the Bible, but I’ve never felt the Holy Spirit telling me they were not God’s word.
Remember, the canon was settled, not by a bunch of theologians making a list, but by congregations agreeing that X was scripture, and Y was not.
Do you consider the Book of Enoch to be scripture?
A brief but very insightful presentation.
And to be clear: these dates are the dates of our earliest extant writings containing those doctrines. They are not new doctrines from those dates, but are rather understood as authentic doctrines by the authors who wrote at those dates, among the very scarce writings.
1 - I’m not interested in proving that scripture is scripture. You decide to accept it or not. You will be judged by God, not by me, so you must follow your conscience.
2 - If you prefer, “The Pope said so”, that is also your choice. I’m underwhelmed by it.
3 - Did anyone wait to use the Gospels, or Paul’s writing, as scripture until 400 AD, when the local church councils were held?
Nope. They were being used and accepted as scripture and authoritative before ANY church council declared anything. Thus, I conclude that it was a bottom-up process. For it to have been a top-down process, folks would have needed to wait until 400 AD at least - and arguably until the 1500s.
the Catholics are the originals.
Introduction: Heresy [The Great Heresies]
The Great Heresies
John Calvin’s Worst Heresy: That Christ Suffered in Hell
Evangelical Lutheran Church in America Succumbs to Heresy
The Bishop Discovers Heresy?
From Orthodox to Heresy: The Secularizing of Catholic Universities
Progressivism/Liberalism is Heresy [Excellent read & reference]
Is heresy better than schism? [Ecumenical]
Modernism: The Modernist Heresy
THE GREAT HERESIES-THE MODERN PHASE
The Protestant Heresy
The Gospel According to Mary Magdalene
Americanism, Then and Now: Our Pet Heresy (encyclical of Pope Leo XIII)
Heresies then and now: ancient Christian heresies practiced in modern times
The Plain Truth About The Baptist Bride Heresy
Balthasar, Hell, and Heresy: An Exchange (is it compatable with the Catholic faith?)
Know Your Heresies
The Rev. John Piper: an interesting look at "heresy vs. schism"
Pietism as an Ecclesiological Heresy
Heresy
Arian Heresy Still Tempts, Says Cardinal Bertone (Mentions Pelagianism As Well)
Catholic Discussion] Church group stays faithful (to heresy!)
An overview of modern anti-Trinitarian heresies
Where heresy and dissent abound [Minnesota]
Gnostic Gospels - the heresy entitled "Gnosticism."
Christian mavericks find affirmation in ancient heresies
The So-Called ‘Gospel’ of Judas: Unmasking an Ancient Heresy
Benedict XVI Heresies and Errors
Donatism (Know your heresies)
The Heresy of Mohammed (Chapter 4, The Great Heresies)
Father & Son Catholic Writers Tag-Team Old & New Heresies
Actually, I’ve said that large parts of the visible church went astray, particularly in theology, but that God still saved those who responded to Him.
care to us what part of the “visible church” didn’t go astray?
“who has the authority to say infallibly this is the correct cannon of Scripture?”
you answered “God”. please tell me where God provides a table of contents for the canon or does God communicate to you directly the canon?
No. But Jude 1:14-15 quotes from it.
“And Enoch also, the seventh from Adam, prophesied of these [men], saying, Behold, the Lord cometh with ten thousands of his saints, To execute judgment upon all, and to convince all that are ungodly among them of all their ungodly deeds which they have ungodly committed, and of all their hard speeches which ungodly sinners have spoken against him.”
Then using your reasoning for what is or is not canonical, shouldn’t you add the Book of Enoch to your canon?
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.