“Let’s stick to discussing things that are relevant.”
Knowing that the bible predates the Protestants is kinda relevant to the topic at hand.
“So, you obey the Jewish authorities, since their Scriptures predated Rome, right?”
Absolutely I do.
“Yet, you would credit it, not to God, or to those He revealed it to, but to some later editors and compilers?”
As opposed to crediting it to Luther? Absolutely.
“How exactly is that seemly behavior for a Christian?”
How is a statement of historical fact arrogant?
“Knowing that the bible predates the Protestants is kinda relevant to the topic at hand.”
So, why is it that you disagree with Augustine on the Predestination of the Saints, and salvation, consequently, through the grace of God and not by man’s merit?
WHAT IS THE VIEW OF THE PELAGIANS, AND WHAT OF THE SEMI-PELAGIANS, CONCERNING PREDESTINATION.
“But these brethren of ours, about whom and on whose behalf we are now discoursing, say, perhaps, that the Pelagians are refuted by this apostolical testimony in which it is said that we are chosen in Christ and predestinated before the foundation of the world, in order that we should be holy and immaculate in His sight in love. For they think that “having received God’s commands we are of ourselves by the choice of our free will made holy and immaculate in His sight in love; and since God foresaw that this would be the case,” they say, “He therefore chose and predestinated us in Christ before the foundation of the world.” Although the apostle says that it was not because He foreknew that we should be such, but in order that we might be such by the same election of His grace, by which He showed us favour in His beloved Son. When, therefore, He predestinated us, He foreknew His own work by which He makes us holy and immaculate. Whence the Pelagian error is rightly refuted by this testimony. “But we say,” say they, “that God did not foreknow anything as ours except that faith by which we begin to believe, and that He chose and predestinated us before the foundation of the world, in order that we might be holy and immaculate by His grace and by His work.” But let them also hear in this testimony the words where he says, “We have obtained a lot, being predestinated according to His purpose who worketh all things.” [Eph. 1.11.] He, therefore, work-eth the beginning of our belief who worketh all things; because faith itself does not precede that calling of which it is said: “For the gifts and calling of God are without repentance;” [Rom. 11.29.] and of which it is said: “Not of works, but of Him that calleth” [Rom. 9.12.] (although He might have said, “of Him that believeth”); and the election which the Lord signified when He said: “Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you.” [John 15.16.] For He chose us, not because we believed, but that we might believe, lest we should be said first to have chosen Him, and so His word be false (which be it far from us to think possible), “Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you.” Neither are we called because we believed, but that we may believe; and by that calling which is without repentance it is effected and carried through that we should believe. But all the many things which we have said concerning this matter need not be repeated.”
http://www.covenanter.org/Predestination/augustin_predestination.html
These, you would claim, are Protestant innovations made upon the teachings of Paul. But, in reality, they are the Gospel as delivered to us by the Apostles themselves, which have always existed, long before Calvin or Luther.
So why are you in rebellion against God and His church, as defined by the Apostles?
Gal 1:6-9 I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel: (7) Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ. (8) But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. (9) As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.
Is this curse on me, or is it on the Roman church which teaches innovations that the word of God does not know?
“Knowing that the bible predates the Protestants is kinda relevant to the topic at hand.”
This comment doesn’t address the point I made about why the answer wouldn’t be relevant. If you want me to answer some hypothetical question on this subject, then the situation you construct must fit the situation we are speaking about, or my answer wouldn’t have any relevance to the original topic. Yours did not, for the reasons I explained. If you want to re-pose the question so that it fits the context, then my answer could be relevant and I’d be happy to give it.
“Absolutely I do.”
How so, when you do not accept the same canon that Jewish authorities have declared? Or when you express belief in the divinity of Christ, which the Jewish authorities denounce as a heresy and a blasphemy?
“As opposed to crediting it to Luther? Absolutely.”
Nobody credits the Bible to Luther, so this statement is a red herring. This isn’t a multiple choice question: was the Bible written by God, or was it written by the Catholic church? If you pick one, you must deny the other.
“How is a statement of historical fact arrogant?”
Well, it wasn’t a statement of fact, but a boast. You said it was “our book”, as if you owned God’s Word (note the possessive?), and then you claimed Protestants “nicked it”, against asserting ownership of what is rightfully God’s. God revealed the Word to men, and commanded us to share it freely with anyone who would hear. It is not possible to own what is not yours, and it is not possible to “nick” what is freely given to all by God’s grace.