The Latin Church ratified the decision of the Third North African Council of Carthage at the end of the 4th century. Subsequently, various popes listed all the books in the canon. Deuterocanoncail OT books (referred to as apocryphal by Protestants) were used in the East. There was never any dispute about them until the Reformation.
The Council of Trent only reiterated the books of the canon used by the Church for 11 centuries. The east never officially declared the books. The use of these books became a matter of consensus (the North African Council was a local council and therefore non binding).
That doesn't explain why the Protestants accept the Christian canon (New Testament) put together by the Church if the church was in 'apostasy' and if her authority is rejected. Surely the Bible didn't fall form the sky like manna.
It is not contrary to logic, but it is not contained within logic. Call it logic+
No, it's not contrary to logic. I agree. Once you make illogical assumptions as the basis of religion, the rest proceeds logically. The problem is that the very foundation is an illogical a priori assumption. Hence the uncertainly is never removed. One never really knows. One has to believe it no matter how bizarre it may seem.
If we assume, illogically, that pink unicorns live on Jupiter, and we accept that assumption as unquestionable truth and fact (let' use a biblical example, it was revealed in a trance), then we can logically proceed to speak of the characteristics, size, and manner, etc. of these unicorns as if they really existed.
And something can certainly be factual without being subject to logic, since no one possesses perfect logic
But until it is logically understood, we do not know what it is!
Certainly, if God exists, He exists in a way our logic won’t be able to comprehend. God may be a fact without being a conclusion
Of course. But since he is "beyond everything" we can never know what God is. If we don't know what God is how can we recognize God? Hence my inquiry: how do you know...it's from God?
However, I would certainly agree that Christianity is about revelation, not logic. It is the job of the Holy Spirit to convict people, not mine.
How do you know it's the job of the Holy Spirit?
That would be further east than Jerusalem...The folks who were entrusted with the Oracles of God did not allow them in their scriptures...
Rom 3:1 What advantage then hath the Jew? or what profit is there of circumcision?
Rom 3:2 Much every way: chiefly, because that unto them were committed the oracles of God.
First, there continued to be discussion about which books were canon for a thousand years after Carthage, with various scholars (RCC) suggesting changes. And ALL of the canonical lists were ratifications, not determinations.
The Reformation continued with the NT canon, but set aside the disputed OT books that had never won full acceptance. I think most Protestants agree that the Catholic Church hadn’t drifted very far during the first 300 years, and were in a good position to know what the local churches had already believed for 250+ years. The Gospels and Paul’s Epistles were accepted as scripture almost as soon as they were penned.
There is a book you might be interested in - ‘A Severe Mercy’. Just checked - still in print after 20 years (http://www.amazon.com/Severe-Mercy-Sheldon-Vanauken/dp/0060688246/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1248010573&sr=1-1) It starts with a man explaining his own path to Christianity at Oxford after WW2. Logic only carries you so far, after which there is a ‘leap of faith’ - but as someone pointed out to him, there was also a leap of faith to go backwards into unbelief.
Another book - I read much of it yesterday flying back from Indiana - is ‘Deep Survival’ (http://www.amazon.com/Deep-Survival-Who-Lives-Dies/dp/0393326152/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1248010657&sr=1-1). It discusses a variety of accidents from the viewpoint of recent knowledge about how humans make decisions. Humans are not logical, nor were our minds meant to be. Our minds are irrevocably linked to our bodies and emotions, and thought is another form of emotion...or maybe the other way around.
You have inherited certain forms of thought, just as Border Collies can be bred with an eye towards herding techniques. I just got back from visiting family I hadn’t seen in 40 years. My Dad died when I was 14 (and left for Vietnam when I was 12). Yet his family say my mannerisms and thought patterns are exactly like his.
If a Border Collie can inherit a long outrun (sweep out to gather sheep), or inherit how much force they will use in working sheep, then why do we act as though our thoughts are independent of us?
When you understand that ‘thought’ and ‘emotion’ are different expressions of the same process, a lot of human actions become clearer. When you understand that behaviors are genetically based, in many cases, then original sin becomes easier to understand.
Logic is as false a description of human thought as the physics of Aristotle were a false description of the world in which we live - although those physics were a good enough description to last for 1500 years! Logic is a tool for problem solving, but emotions and faith are also a critical part of how our brain works. My wife’s intuition is right as often as my logic, and why not? They are both the result of the same sort of thought processes inside our minds.
And I BELIEVE it is the job of the Holy Spirit. However, belief is also rooted in how our brains work to comprehend the world and make timely decisions. Someone who separates belief, emotion and thought doesn’t understand the processes by which our brains make it possible for us to function in the world.