“You are talking to the wrong guy. While I tend to work out of the Protestant Bible as being the most universally agreed upon, I am not fond of the concept of a ‘canon’.”
There’s no Word without a Canon. The Word cannot, and does not define itself, but the Church sets the Canon. Protestants don’t get around this problem, they simply use a different tradition (that of Luther’s), rather than that of Pope Damasus from the 4th century.
“So what if they do? Such antics have been attempted before, and will undoubtedly be attempted again. Somehow, the Word of YHWH is preserved in spite of what any (including yours) attempt to do.”
Obviously not, given that those who have already mutilated the Canon now assert that their Canon is correct.
“Your interpretation thereof is likely to be different from mine”
That doesn’t make your interpretation correct. There is a threefolk heirarchy right in scripture. If you are arguing that Acts is part of the Word, then you cannot argue that the Church ought not have a heirarchy.
“ANY ONE of ANY disciples could be the only true Church and carry the laying on of hands.”
Nonsense. All of them are part of the true Church. Every single one and their disciples are as well. There is no division between the Apostles, but there is a division between Luther’s followers and the Church. And between Calvin’s followers and Luther’s followers and the Church. And between Zwingli’s followers, and Calvin’s followers, and Luther’s followers and the Church. Etc so on and so forth.
Not according to the Word, it doesn't. The Oracles of YHWH are committed to the Hebrews, not the Romans. There was no 'canon' prior to some 'necessity' as defined by Rome. The 'canon' is and always has been the Torah. That which is accepted scripture beyond that is defined by the Torah.
And the Word certainly DOES define itself. Every single book of it has both Word and prophecy intertwined. The 'Word' must not transgress the Torah, and the 'Prophecy' cannot transgress the prophets.
Protestants don’t get around this problem, they simply use a different tradition (that of Luther’s), rather than that of Pope Damasus from the 4th century.
Nonsense. The Protestant tradition has not been without examination since the time of Luther. What they accept has been tirelessly addressed over and again. And they are right in that which they accept. Everything they do accept IS Word. What y'all accept is questionable... And neither one necessarily have it all.
Obviously not, given that those who have already mutilated the Canon now assert that their Canon is correct.
I didn't say that either canon was correct. I have asserted that the Protestant Bible is the most accepted - You admit that the books within are Word, and so do I... You would add others to it, but that does not detract from the fact that you do accept every one of those books.
That doesn’t make your interpretation correct. There is a threefolk heirarchy right in scripture. If you are arguing that Acts is part of the Word, then you cannot argue that the Church ought not have a heirarchy.
I most certainly can. And I most certainly DO.
Nonsense. All of them are part of the true Church. Every single one and their disciples are as well
Oh, I have no doubt that all of them are a part of the true Church... But that Church is not the Roman church. Else I would be a Roman even now (*shudder*).