WHO..decided the Bible canon? (page 5)

gumby

Quote:..."Marcion promulgated a collection of "scriptures" consisting of the Gospel of Luke and ten letters of Paul, all heavily edited. The lesson was not lost on the later church. Both Marcion and the excluded books if they were deemed to deviate from desirable doctrine or practice. Marcion is also know to have taken scissors and paste to the documents he chose, He cut out parts of Luke and the Pauline letters that he didn't like

So....with all this cutting and pasting back then, and with all the editing by influential men.....we are supposed to believe God had his hand in this particular method of putting his word together? Sounds odd dosen't it???

William Penwell

Gumby said:

So....with all this cutting and pasting back then, and with all the editing by influential men.....we are supposed to believe God had his hand in this particular method of putting his word together? Sounds odd dosen't it???

You are so right. The more I read and do research on the subject of the bible the less confidence I have that is the "Word of God". I don't believe anything that a Christian Church tells you because they only will tell you what they want you to hear. How the early Christian Church killed and perscuted those that had a differnt ideas than the majority held. How they burnt and destroyed any books that differed from their point of view. Than we are to accept anything they say is a bunch of BSl.

Will

"I am quite sure now that often, very often, in matters concerning religion and politics a man's reasoning powers are not above the monkey's."
Mark Twain

gumby

WP: How the early Christian Church killed and perscuted those that had a differnt ideas than the majority held.

Do you suppose God was not happy with that part of their live's, but used them ANYWAY to get his word to us?

Most Christians (western that is) would'nt think of killing and persecuting those who refuse them.

They do however consider you a problem person if you differ with them on any major doctrinal issue.

bluesapphire

Thanks William. I would appreciate your sources.

Just an FYI though. Irenaeus talked about the Gospels being like the four corners of the earth nearly 100 years AFTER the gospels had already been generally accepted by the Church. Just because he used that analogy doesn't mean that was the REASON they were accepted.

I am aware of many apocrypha such as the books you describe. Actually, this adds credibility to my position that anyone who believes in the current New Testament accepts the authority of the Catholic Church. The fact that there are so many other books out there that didn't make it into the canon proves my point.

If someone wants to make their own canon, they are welcome to do it. But out of all these 10,000 Christian sects, I don't know any who have.

Yadira Angelini

Bluesapphire,

Where did you get your brain from? your mom? LOL

I love you and I am really impressed! Love always,

Mom

PS: sorry I'm been a little bias here; I couldn't help it.

William Penwell

bluesapphire

I am aware of many apocrypha such as the books you describe. Actually, this adds credibility to my position that anyone who believes in the current New Testament accepts the authority of the Catholic Church. The fact that there are so many other books out there that didn't make it into the canon proves my point.

I am not saying that these books are anymore right than the present canon but What does the Church fear of this other books? Who was the God that decided these books are in and those books are out? The only reason why they were not excepted is because they did not support their doctrines. All the books should have been made available to everyone and then let us decide what we accept and what we don't accept. Even though the Church tried to suppress these other books they are now being rediscovered.

Will

"I am quite sure now that often, very often, in matters concerning religion and politics a man's reasoning powers are not above the monkey's."
Mark Twain

bluesapphire

I am not saying that these books are anymore right than the present canon but What does the Church fear of this other books?

I don't think they do fear. I think you think they fear though. If you think they fear, then you tell me why.

Who was the God that decided these books are in and those books are out?

Is it your contention then that "God" decided which books were in or out? It is my contention that God did this through an organization.

The only reason why they were not excepted is because they did not support their doctrines.

BINGO. Which is exactly why they also make the claim that it is their responsibility to interpret those books in light of orthodoxy. How can someone come along now and take those same books which were chosen because they supported the doctrines of the Church and twist them to NOT support those very same doctrines?

All the books should have been made available to everyone and then let us decide what we accept and what we don't accept.

So you think the Church should have extended the same arduous effort that they did in preserving the books they did to some other books that they felt were not inspired?

Exactly why should they have done that? Would you spend your time and energy buying costly paper (remember the cost of paper involved here), ink, manually copying for hundreds of years some writings which you didn't even believe in?

Who are you to say that the Catholic Church should have done that? Why didn't the sects which wrote those books do it themselves? Why should the responsibility have fallen on the Catholic Church? The Church's responsibility was to preserve the ORIGINAL teachings, not the heresies. If the heretics were interested in preserving their own writings, they should have done it.

Even though the Church tried to suppress these other books they are now being rediscovered.

They were not lost. The Church has many manuscripts of non-canonical writings which you are talking about in its possession. And there are others in the Brittish Museum. Just because the Church didn't hand deliver them to you doesn't mean it tried to suppress them. If they were in the Church's possession, then why didn't they just burn them if they wanted to suppress them?

The fact is that the Church has preserved many non-canonical writings. Where do you think you could read the post-apostolic writings if it were not for the Church having preserved them for all those centuries.

And as far as the books which were just recently found in this century, well how exactly could the Church have even known where they were in order to "suppress" them?

Remember to look at things from the world view of the different centuries. You can't attribute our commodities and ability to obtain supplies, print and distribute easily and cheaply to a time when those commodities didn't exist.

seedy3

Barry,

The "400's" was a typo I didn't catch, it was suppose to be the "300's".

Seedy

gumby

WilliamPenn said:
I am not saying that these books are anymore right than the present canon but What does the Church fear of this other books?

Blue Sapphire replies:
"I don't think they do fear. I think you think they fear though. If you think they fear, then you tell me why".

And I have a question for you BlueSapphire

Why DON'T you think they feared it?

I'm not picking on you, but you already asked WP to show you WHY and I want to compare your feelings with his.

quote: WP
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Who was the God that decided these books are in and those books are out?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
BlueSapphire said:

"Is it your contention then that "God" decided which books were in or out? It is my contention that God did this through an organization".

I would like to see WHAT made each of you believe the way you do.

quote:WP

The only reason why they were not excepted is because they did not support their doctrines.

Bluesapphire quote:

"BINGO. Which is exactly why they also make the claim that it is their responsibility to interpret those books in light of orthodoxy".

So Bluesapphire, you are saying there were OTHER doctrines out there but the catholic church was intrusted by God to decide that for all of us .

Why were their OTHER DOCTRINES?

How would the Catholics KNOW which was heresy and which was real? They weren't there! Did God guide them?

Where does this Holy spirit that is supposed to "guide us in all things".. come in? Is he also in co-hoots with the Catholic church and they work together? We get the Bible from the Catholics, read it, believe in it, and the Holy Spirit does his job?

Bluesapphire Quote:

"The Church has many manuscripts of non-canonical writings which you are talking about in its possession. And there are others in the Brittish Museum. Just because the Church didn't hand deliver them to you doesn't mean it tried to suppress them".

Why do they keep stories of heresies? Or are these OTHER books heresies? Thomas, the maccabee's etc.?

If they are not heresies....why aren't they part of the bible?

LyinEyes

Thank you all so much for your insight on this question. It is one
of great burning interest to me right now. I have been out of JW for
a year and have seemed to lost almost all of my faith in the Bible.
I want to beleive it, I want to beleive in God . I think somewhere
deep inside it is there. Here lately , I have been having some very
strong feelings about being Catholic, I was baptized as an infant and all of my family is Catholic. I want to have a relationship with
the Lord. I want to beleive, more than anything I could wish for right now. When did you know to go to the church? Did you start having some spiritual awaking, or some nagging hunger , even if
you were not sure what you were looking for? I dont trust my feelings on this,, am I feeling the lose of my spirtuality as I once knew, or could God really be trying to help me to have faith?
The JW did such a trick on me, I am afraid to trust myself on this.

WHO..decided the Bible canon?

Share this