Replies

Yet i have never seen them do it or make it an issue, nor condemn Catholic dissenters on the apocrypha before Trent, and instead nonconformity with the RC canon only seems to made a real issue against Protestants, as the only reason it was an issue in the 16th century and that it is one now is because it serves as polemic against their real competition, those who rightly hold Scripture as the supreme doctrinal authority, which Scripture abundantly evidences it is.

Finally, if non-conformity with Rome on the canon is such a major issue, then they should be at war with other Catholics whose canon is different, it matters little whether by one book or several. At least the SS type Prots are the most devoted readers of Holy Writ, and more conservative, as compared to their Catholic counterparts.

I think you have summed up beautifully what the TRUE dispute is here. Some Roman Catholics are absolutely convinced, beyond ANY possible evidence to the contrary, that whatever they are told by Rome is THE truth and any and all attempts to pry them away from the breast of the "Mother Church" will be seen as tantamount to Satanic activity. Yet, here we are - those who once DID suckle at that breast - weaned and matured enough to recognize the truth of God's word supersedes what men can devise no matter how pure and holy they may try to appear.

As you brought out, the issue of an "Official" canon did not become important enough to the Papal powers until others challenged their professed antiquity of doctrine and forced them to take a stand about an area they had not deemed essential enough before. That the Roman Catholic Church taught the existence of "Purgatory" without ANY Scriptural proof, was only one of many such dogmas that were contradicted by Holy Scripture. Yet some obscure passage in a non-canonical book was offered as such proof and that made the inclusion of that book mandatory into the Divinely-inspired collection of Holy Scripture.

Praying to the dead was another such dogma that a fishing expedition in the Apocrypha turned up a "sorta", "maybe", "could mean" type of reference. All other universally undisputed Scriptures that condemned contacting the dead were ignored in favor of a passage that pretended to pass muster. I wonder why, if Rome considered herself infallible, her hierarchy even thought they NEEDED to prove their doctrines by Scripture. Hadn't they already placed themselves ABOVE the Scriptures anyway?

I don't know about you, but this whole Apocrypha vs. Canon argument smells like three-week old pizza forgotten and left out in the sun. It is just another example of how the enemy of our souls likes nothing better than subterfuge and distraction. Anything to get us away from talking about the Gospel of salvation by grace through faith in Christ. The "simplicity that is in Christ" is obscured by all the needless and silly disagreements that place more importance on the myriad possible things that can be argued about than the one thing that is and should stay inarguable - that God so loved the world that He gave his only begotten son that whosoever believes in him will not perish but have everlasting life.

Thank you for your patient and scholarly input. It has reinforced what I know God's word really is - infallible and Divine. The saying, "You can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink.", seems apt here. We can only hope a few "horses" are thirsty enough, but all we can do is lead them to the water. Once the water of truth is tasted, it is only right that the more we drink the more we will want to remain at that spring of eternal life.