Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I wasn’t intending to be gratuitous. I don’t know what other authority you could have for determining which books to include other than an organization of human beings. I’ve read the books not included and I think a wise choice was made by the human organization. So I accept it. But I wouldn’t expect everyone to do that research. It makes more sense to accept whatever the learned leaders of your church have done the research on.
I think you are missing the point.
It is that there even should be a "determination of which books to include"/a canon that is the question here. Or at least that's how I read the OP.
This is the perfect thread to post the example again of Psalm 46...
Oh, that King James, what a little devil...so much for not changing a jot and a tittle while his minions wrote out the first Bible..a huge feat. Matt 5:18
Only in the KJV....count down 46 words to shake...count up from the last word 46 words to spear!
Ol' King James' homage to William Shakespeare who was 46 that year.
See for yourself...lazy?
v3 and v9....found in no other version or translation.
Surprised? Me, too.
Ha, no, only surprised at your surprise, Miss H. Heard this at least 20 years ago, and in fact subsequently read it in here, where it earned a mention as an amusing note:
Personally I consider myself a follower of Jesus Christ, but I have strong objections to the idea of an "official" canon of books which are considered to be "inspired".
Because if you accept the Roman church's official canon, or the Protestant canon, then you are actually putting your faith in a human organization.
Does anyone else feel this way?
Yeah it's sad that authoritarian religions distorted the true teaching of the Master.
This is the perfect thread to post the example again of Psalm 46...
Oh, that King James, what a little devil...so much for not changing a jot and a tittle while his minions wrote out the first Bible..a huge feat. Matt 5:18
Only in the KJV....count down 46 words to shake...count up from the last word 46 words to spear!
Ol' King James' homage to William Shakespeare who was 46 that year.
See for yourself...lazy?
v3 and v9....found in no other version or translation.
Surprised? Me, too.
So, you’re saying that a difference in interpretation somehow disproves the whole Bible?
Yes, your understanding is what your church organization teaches you. Should anyone be surprised? Mystic goes a little overboard in his statement about Jesus' intentions, but that is simply because of the belief in what "church" means to the followers of the various organizations that label themselves "church:" it no more means a particular organization than it does a particular building. ἐκκλησία is "properly, people called out from the world and to God" and your citation from Matthew simply means that the body of believers will found their faith in the idea that Jesus embodied the Christ, or the Way that He taught. No political organization that may administer to that body of believers IS that body, nor the authority OF that body. Your political body claims to have been established and led by the promised Spirit, but how do they demonstrate that leading? Simple answer: they don't; they simply claim it is there, but they make no reference to the character OF that Spirit in their deliberations or conclusions. "My sheep will know my voice" is good, but how? By the nature of what that voice tells them. Giving that authority to a book is a cop out to the need to distinguish the nature of the Spirit that leads and that can be seen by the fact that arguments are ALWAYS about the grammatical meaning of the book instead of the nature of the interpretation, which should ALWAYS be about what is in the best interests of everyone involved in any situation (not always easy to be determined).
The character of the Spirit is very clearly known. The Spirit is Love. We are called to love one another. That was 100% of Jesus’ teaching. The body of believers are those who accept this message and make an effort to live a loving life. The Church is a Jesus-founded, human-run organization that attempts to guide people in this lifestyle. Jesus obviously intended to start an non-political organization to carry on his work, as opposed to merely a collection of individuals. This is proven in him selecting 12 Apostles among all the disciples. It is also proven in the formation of the Church by the Apostles after the Resurrection
Then you would be nullifying the promise of Jesus.
How so? Yes, it is possible for someone living in a remote corner of the word and never exposed to religion to be given the gift of the Holy Spirit. All things are posssible with God. But God also established a Church to do the leg work of bringing the gospel to most people. It is much easier for someone to receive the Spirit if they have been prepared spiritually beforehand.
With regard to the New Testament canon, the Protestant, Roman Catholic, and Eastern Orthodox church have the same 27 books in the canon. The differences between those three branches of the church are with regard to the Old Testament canon.
There are two sides to the canon. The divine side and the human side. From the divine perspective, the New Testament canon in principle was complete once the last of the New Testament books was written around the end of the first century AD. From the human side, and in practice, a long time passed before all 27 New Testament books were recognized as divinely inspired and therefore authoritative, although 21 of the 27 books were already considered canonical before the end of the 2nd century AD. The Muratorian Canon or fragment, dated to c. AD 170-200 lists those 21 books.
The area of dispute was over the other six books which eventually were recognized as being a part of the canon. The final New Testament canon was not the result of any determination by a church council but by the widespread usage of those books by the believing community. The church councils simply confirmed the widespread use of the books which had long been regarded as canonical, and endorsed them.
There were some external factors which encouraged the church to recognize which of the New Testament
books were authoritative and which were not. Those factors included the heretic Marcion who had, with regard to the New Testament Gospels, accepted only the gospel of Luke and not even everything in that Gospel. As for the Epistles, Marcion removed anything which did not agree with his understanding of what Paul should have written. Needless to say, Marcion's idea of what constituted the canon was not in keeping with the church at large.
Gnosticism was another contributing factor which made it necessary to place a limit on which books belonged in the New Testament canon and which did not. The Gnostics had produced many writings which contradicted the teachings of the apostles.
Another factor was the Diocletian persecution of the church. In AD 303, Diocletian gave an edit in which all Christian scriptures were to be surrendered and burned. Failure to surrender those scriptures could result in death. It was necessary then for believers to decide which books were worth dying for, and which books could be surrendered.
There were certain criteria used for recognizing the canonicity of a New Testament book. One such criterion was apostolicity. In order for a book to be recognized as authoritative it had to have been written by an apostle or by someone closely associated with an apostle. This of course ruled out any book written after the last of the apostles had died. The Muritorian Canon mentions this as a reason why the Shepard of Hermas could not be accepted into the canon.
The Pastor, moreover, did Hermas write very recently in our times in the city of Rome, while his brother bishop Plus sat in the chair of the Church of Rome. And therefore it also ought to be read; but it cannot be made public38 in the Church to the people, nor placed among the prophets, as their number is complete, nor among the apostles to the end of time.
While even today there are some who think that certain New Testament books don't belong in the canon and that the canon should include books which aren't a part of it, the canon as we have it is the result of generally accepted usage of the early church and I believe that the formation of the New Testament canon as we have it was guided by the Holy Spirit.
Quote:
Originally Posted by nateswift
So you believe the Spirit intended to give the authority of God away to a book?
Just as the apostles, having been appointed by Jesus, carried His authority, so too the New Testament canon carries the authority of the apostles, and therefore of Jesus. While it is the only New Testament book to expressly do so, the Book of Revelation specifically states that the Revelation was given by God (the Father) to Jesus who communicated it to John by His angel. Revelation then claims to be the word of God. But the other New Testament books are no less so.
Just as the New Testament books are divinely inspired, I believe that the process of recognizing the formation of the canon was also divinely inspired.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
