Posted on 10/27/2013 5:25:55 AM PDT by NYer
There are 38 questions + a few bonus questions. I have split them into two separate posts of 20 and 18 + bonus questions. In case you missed it, here is the link to Part 1. Are you ready?
21. Who in the Church had the authority to determine which books belonged in the New Testament canon and to make this decision binding on all Christians? If nobody has this authority, then can I remove or add books to the canon on my own authority?
22. Why do Protestant scholars recognize the early Church councils at Hippo and Carthage as the first instances in which the New Testament canon was officially ratified, but ignore the fact that those same councils ratified the Old Testament canon used by the Catholic Church today but abandoned by Protestants at the Reformation?
23. Why do Protestants follow postapostolic Jewish decisions on the boundaries of the Old Testament canon, rather than the decision of the Church founded by Jesus Christ?
24. How were the bishops at Hippo and Carthage able to determine the correct canon of Scripture, in spite of the fact that they believed all the distinctively Catholic doctrines such as the apostolic succession of bishops, the sacrifice of the Mass, Christ’s Real Presence in the Eucharist, baptismal regeneration, etc?
25. If Christianity is a “book religion,” how did it flourish during the first 1500 years of Church history when the vast majority of people were illiterate?
26. How could the Apostle Thomas establish the church in India that survives to this day (and is now in communion with the Catholic Church) without leaving them with one word of New Testament Scripture?
27. If sola Scriptura is so solid and biblically based, why has there never been a full treatise written in its defense since the phrase was coined in the Reformation?
28. If Jesus intended for Christianity to be exclusively a “religion of the book,” why did He wait 1400 years before showing somebody how to build a printing press?
29. If the early Church believed in sola Scriptura, why do the creeds of the early Church always say “we believe in the Holy Catholic Church,” and not “we believe in Holy Scripture”?
30. If the Bible is as clear as Martin Luther claimed, why was he the first one to interpret it the way he did and why was he frustrated at the end of his life that “there are now as many doctrines as there are heads”?
31. The time interval between the Resurrection and the establishment of the New Testament canon in AD 382 is roughly the same as the interval between the arrival of the Mayflower in America and the present day. Therefore, since the early Christians had no defined New Testament for almost four hundred years, how did they practice sola Scriptura?
32. If the Bible is the only foundation and basis of Christian truth, why does the Bible itself say that the Church is the pillar and foundation of truth (1 Tim. 3:15)?
33. Jesus said that the unity of Christians would be objective evidence to the world that He had been sent by God (John 17:20-23). How can the world see an invisible "unity" that exists only in the hearts of believers?
34. If the unity of Christians was meant to convince the world that Jesus was sent by God, what does the ever-increasing fragmentation of Protestantism say to the world?
35. Hebrews 13:17 says, "Obey your leaders and submit to their authority. They keep watch over you as men who must give an account. Obey them so that their work will be a joy, not a burden, for that would be of no advantage to you." What is the expiration date of this verse? When did it become okay not only to disobey the Church's leaders, but to rebel against them and set up rival churches?
36. The Koran explicitly claims divine inspiration, but the New Testament books do not. How do you know that the New Testament books are nevertheless inspired, but the Koran is not?
37. How does a Protestant know for sure what God thinks about moral issues such as abortion, masturbation, contraceptives, eugenics, euthanasia, etc.?
38. What is one to believe when one Protestant says infants should be baptized (e.g., Luther and Calvin) and another says it is wrong and unbiblical (e.g., Baptists and Evangelicals)?
Where does the Bible . . .
. . . say God created the world/universe out of nothing?
. . . say salvation is attainable through faith alone?
. . . tell us how we know that the revelation of Jesus Christ ended with the death of the last Apostle?
. . . provide a list of the canonical books of the Old Testament?
. . . provide a list of the canonical books of the New Testament?
. . . explain the doctrine of the Trinity, or even use the word “Trinity”?
. . . tell us the name of the “beloved disciple”?
. . . inform us of the names of the authors of the Gospel of Matthew, Mark, Luke, or John?
. . . who wrote the Book of Acts?
. . . tell us the Holy Spirit is one of the three Persons of the Trinity?
. . . .tell us Jesus Christ was both fully God and fully man from the moment of conception (e.g. how do we know His Divinity wasn't infused later in His life?) and/or tells us Jesus Christ is One Person with two complete natures, human and Divine and not some other combination of the two natures (i.e., one or both being less than complete)?
. . . that the church should, or someday would be divided into competing and disagreeing denominations?
. . . that Protestants can have an invisible unity when Jesus expected a visible unity to be seen by the world (see John 17)?
. . . tell us Jesus Christ is of the same substance of Divinity as God the Father?
What proof to YOU have that Theophilus was NOT a real person?
Were you there?
Did Luke tell you?
Anything but your unsubstantiated say so?
THEOPHILUS [thē ŏfˊə ləs] (Gk. Theophilos “dear to God” or “friend of God”). A person (rather than, as some suggest, a symbolic “friend of God”) to whom Luke dedicated his gospel (Luke 1:3) and its sequel, the Acts of the Apostles (Acts 1:1). Theophilus may have been a member of the equestrian class, though the honorific title “most excellent” (Gk. krátistos; Luke 1:3) is used both in addressing Roman officials, notably procurators (e.g., Acts 23:26; 24:2; 26:25) and as a common courteous address (Josephus Vita 76 [430]; Ap. i.1 [1]). Since a fruitful reading of the third gospel and Acts requires some acquaintance with Judaism and, in the case of the gospel, the topography of Palestine, Theophilus was most likely a Gentile “God-fearer” in need of an “orderly account” of the gospel, about which he may have had some knowledge.
Eerdman's Bible Dictionary
THEOPHILUS (Gk. theophilos, ‘dear to God’, ‘friend of God’), the man to whom both parts of Luke’s history were dedicated (Lk. 1:3; Acts 1:1). Some have thought that the name indicates generally ‘the Christian reader’, others that it conceals a well-known figure, such as Titus Flavius Clemens, the emperor Vespasian’s nephew (so B. H. Streeter, The Four Gospels, 1924, pp. 534ff.). But it is most probably a real name. The title ‘most excellent’ given to him in Lk. 1:3 may denote a member of the equestrian order (possibly in some official position) or may be a courtesy title (cf. Acts 23:26; 24:3; 26:25). Theophilus had acquired some information about Christianity, but Luke decided to supply him with a more orderly and reliable account. He may have been a representative of that class of Rom. society which Luke wished to influence in favour of the gospel, but scarcely the advocate briefed for Paul’s defence before Nero (so J. I. Still, St Paul on Trial, 1923, pp. 84ff.). F. F. Bruce
Acts 15:3 And being brought on their way by the church (ekklésia), they passed through Phenice and Samaria, declaring the conversion of the Gentiles: and they caused great joy unto all the brethren. 4 And when they were come to Jerusalem, they were received of the church (ekklésia), and of the apostles and elders, and they declared all things that God had done with them.
The word used in Acts 15 is “ekklésia” which means an assembly of believers which has been translated “church”. The synagogues were never referred to as “ekklésia” and those meetings in homes certainly were never referred to as synagogues. As a matter of fact in verse 21 a differentiation is made which indicates they were two distinctly different.
Acts 15:21 For Moses of old time has in every city them that preach him, being read in the synagogues (sunagógé) every sabbath day.
That chapter alone makes a clear distinction.
It’s like the Catholics making up stuff and thinking we should just accept it because they say so.
Very good. I didn't read to the end of the chapter.
Give up!
Luke was not a shill.
Its way too easy to blow you out of the water:
Acts 15:What "churches?" All of the NT congregations were established 'synagogues.'
[20] But that we write unto them, that they abstain from pollutions of idols, and from fornication, and from things strangled, and from blood.
[21] For Moses of old time hath in every city them that preach him, being read in the synagogues every sabbath day.
ekklésia is a congregation, not a church.
The church and the circus were covered by the same word for the Greeks.
While it is true that the word church has taken on a meaning that the word “ekklésia” never meant such as the concept of the RCC hierarchical structure which is contra scripture it still doesn’t discount the fact that today most understand it to mean the assembly of believers.
To try to impugn the Greek text with your comment seems to show desperation.
Yeah, they were preached in the synagogues, not in the assembly (ekklésia) of believers. That chapter makes a clear distinction with the words chosen. That reference didn’t blow anybody out of anything other than to show the error of believing that the assembly of believers was considered a synagogue.
Acts 16:
11 So putting out to sea from Troas, we ran a straight course to Samothrace, and on the day following to Neapolis; 12 and from there to Philippi, which is a leading city of the district of Macedonia, a Roman colony; and we were staying in this city for some days. 13 And on the Sabbath day we went outside the gate to a riverside, where we were supposing that there would be a place of prayer; and we sat down and began speaking to the women who had assembled.
Acts 15:
21 For from the earliest times, Moshe has had in every city those who proclaim him, with his words being read in the synagogues every Shabbat.”
40 However, Sha’ul chose Sila and left, after the brothers had committed him to the love and kindness of the Lord. 41 He went through Syria and Cilicia, strengthening the congregations.
A bit off topic. I will ask the question. If the apostles preached the tradition of transubstantiation do you think in Acts 15 at the Jerusalem council they would have mentioned “do not confuse ‘do not drink’ blood with communion.’” Just saying, kind of odd that would be left out in such a critical doctrine.
Luke was not a shill.
The SpFc in my moniker stands for Special Forces, which implies once I get into combat I never stop. I have been combatting evil men since 1991, and I don't stop. Once men start to discard the truth they gradually lose their sanity'.
Luke was not a shill.
The SpFc in my moniker stands for Special Forces, which implies once I get into combat I never stop. I have been combatting evil men since 1991, and I don't stop. Once men start to discard the truth they gradually lose their sanity'.
#33. Jesus said that the unity of Christians would be objective evidence to the world that He had been sent by God (John 17:20-23). How can the world see an invisible “unity” that exists only in the hearts of believers?
By the looks of your posting history, the evil man has taken over your FR account and posts when you’re not looking.
The way he uses the terms, it is the congregations that occupy the synagogues.
[29] You are to abstain from food sacrificed to idols, from blood from the meat of strangled animals and from sexual immorality.* You will do well to avoid these things. Farewell. [30] The men were
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.