Compiling of the New Testament

[Jon]

Jon,
I would appreciate if you would read/listen to some of the resources from aomin.org on this issue.

You can start by listening to a brief overview of some Roman Catholic issues discussed by James White including Sola Scriptura, apostolic authority and the cannon found here:
http://theopologetics.podbean.com/2011/ ... n-in-rome/

You can post your thoughts here. If you want to skip the intro stuff, go to the 12:17 mark and start listening there.

It makes more sense to me if you can answer someone like James White because he has spent years looking into this issue extensively and debated several Roman Catholics on this issue.

Sean,

I took a look at this website. Clearly James White (who I hadn't heard of until today) has a long history of debating religious topics and he's probably much better at it than I am. I doubt I will be able to catch up on every point where he has told others that he's in the right, and they are in the wrong (please direct me to some place on his website where he actually admits he was wrong, at least once). I also see he has debated with authors who I regard as defenders of the Truth. I think it would not get us anywhere to start arguing one specific point as we'd lose the forest for the trees - he's been debating for 28 years.

It goes without saying that James White and I disagree on a great many topics, but this is not news considering I am Roman Catholic and he is Reformed Baptist. His church got its start, at the very least, more than 1500 years after Christ (I don't know much about the history of the Reformed Baptist Church but I doubt it existed before Luther). I have a problem taking seriously someone who indirectly says, by believing in a church founded so long after Christ, that God led his people wrong for 1500 years, likely sending many to Hell, only to suddenly inspire Luther and others like him to spawn thousands of different interpretations of the Bible. This does not sound like the unity of the Church that Christ talked about, one where "the gates of Hell will not prevail against it". God did not allow the gates of Hell to rule until the Reformed Baptist church came along.

I recommend you check out this website http://www.philvaz.com/apologetics, starting with this article: http://www.philvaz.com/apologetics/a56.htm

There are other sources that rebuke James White's position on other topics, but I'll leave that alone for now. It only takes a short web search to find them. You and I may never agree, but we can both strive to find the one Truth that Jesus taught. I don't believe it can be found in its entirety in ANY Christian denomination. But then, that goes without saying, as a self professed Roman Catholic.

I apologize for straying off my own topic, but it made the most sense to answer here.

Regards,
Jon

[jriccitelli]

Did I not prophesy correctly when in my first post I said; ‘All catholic/Protestant debates seem to end up at 'Who interprets the Bible?’ Is it the 'Catholic Church’, or does a 'reader' have the ability to understand and discern the meaning of scripture’. I recommended the lectures on ‘Authority’ in my first post , since this is where this debate always ends up.

I listen to EWTN (Catholic radio) all the time (and I have called in from time to time) and as we may observe (1260 AM in the Bay Area) that most any protestant discussion with Tim Staples, Patrick Madrid, etc. commonly ends up with the same ‘We’ assembled the canon, and w/o the key’s of Peter no one has any idea of what they are talking about (To Paraphrase it). You will notice that the Tim/Steve debate started with the ‘Authority’ issue and ended with the question of authority, no surprise. So ‘that is why’ I outlined the logical fallacy of having a medium (A man or organization) interpret for God, when we still have to ‘interpret’ what the ‘medium’ said, ourselves. So why would you, or God, bother with a medium?
It is between the speaker (Jesus the Word, His Holy Spirit) and the Hearer (Us). We are to pray to ‘The Father’, read ‘His’ Commandments, and hear ‘His’ Words, and listen for ‘His’ voice, not some man.

[jriccitelli]

So it goes; the Catholic response will be to disagree with any ‘interpretation’ of church history that doesn’t support the Catholic position. As you have said;
“Paidon, we're talking about the same thing but your interpretation of the historical facts is not quite right.”
(John) “I'm not sure who has taught you this information about the Church, but it is a long list of misconceptions and mistruths.”
(John) “Practically everything else you mentioned is a misrepresentation of the truth. The Catholic Church is not as your describe it.”

Have you decided that anything we say about Church history (that the RCC denies) is a lie? You must agree that we are as capable at reading Church history as anyone else, or do we need a special anointing to discern history? The great thing about trusting God is you don’t need to trust in men; “the historical truth about Luther” I’ve read of and condemn the horrible results of the peasant revolts in south Germany. ‘Christianity’ can be blamed for plenty of atrocities (I don’t know if I would call them ‘Christians’ though) but that is the freedom of not following men, Luther was just a man, I don’t follow or uphold any man. Any one who does is not following Christ, how more clear could this be?

Tim Staples and others often say how no one could know the truth with so many denominations, he likes to say they all argue and don’t agree! Well most denominations disagree on some areas, but for the most part we all agree on the basic and major doctrines. Most all the problems are grey areas. I can walk into most any protestant denomination and agree with most everything. The problem starts when they stray from Gods Word and teach doctrines not in scripture. If they are not teaching from Gods Word, I will go to one that is. The devil will always be distorting what God has said, but that doesn’t prove that the Catholic church is the one that is right.
I have some friends who say they believe in Jesus but seem to have very little interest in him. I have known people that go to church’s of all different biblical denominations (As I do have an interest in the differences of denominations) yet we seem to always share the same trust, that is in Jesus alone, His sacrifice, His Word, Faith, Repentance, Baptism, Grace, service, good works, righteousness, love, Creation, Omniscience, Trinity, the Virgin birth, indwelling of the Spirit, heaven, hell, judgement etc.

Jon stated; ”This does not sound like the unity of the Church that Christ talked about”
When I am with my friends we fellowship with Gods Word, and break bread together, not only at Bible study, but we share scripture and our ‘walk’ with God to one another throughout the week, and i think we share a love for one another. And as the posters on this forum are debating different view or sharing the same views, this is part of study and getting to know God, we are all human and just beginning to learn about God. But the Word of God commands us to know Him, each of us, to learn and grow in wisdom of him and with Him and with others, not just bishops. For 'all believers' are given the Holy Spirit. We meet together to learn of and worship Him, that’s what my christian friends do. We may go to different ‘churches’ and denominations but in general we agree on the essentials and hold Gods Word as our Authority and Truth.

‘This' sounds like the unity of the Church that Christ talked about’

[Sean]

Jon,
I would appreciate if you would read/listen to some of the resources from aomin.org on this issue.

You can start by listening to a brief overview of some Roman Catholic issues discussed by James White including Sola Scriptura, apostolic authority and the cannon found here:
http://theopologetics.podbean.com/2011/ ... n-in-rome/

You can post your thoughts here. If you want to skip the intro stuff, go to the 12:17 mark and start listening there.

It makes more sense to me if you can answer someone like James White because he has spent years looking into this issue extensively and debated several Roman Catholics on this issue.

Sean,

I took a look at this website. Clearly James White (who I hadn't heard of until today) has a long history of debating religious topics and he's probably much better at it than I am. I doubt I will be able to catch up on every point where he has told others that he's in the right, and they are in the wrong (please direct me to some place on his website where he actually admits he was wrong, at least once). I also see he has debated with authors who I regard as defenders of the Truth. I think it would not get us anywhere to start arguing one specific point as we'd lose the forest for the trees - he's been debating for 28 years.

It goes without saying that James White and I disagree on a great many topics, but this is not news considering I am Roman Catholic and he is Reformed Baptist. His church got its start, at the very least, more than 1500 years after Christ (I don't know much about the history of the Reformed Baptist Church but I doubt it existed before Luther). I have a problem taking seriously someone who indirectly says, by believing in a church founded so long after Christ, that God led his people wrong for 1500 years, likely sending many to Hell, only to suddenly inspire Luther and others like him to spawn thousands of different interpretations of the Bible. This does not sound like the unity of the Church that Christ talked about, one where "the gates of Hell will not prevail against it". God did not allow the gates of Hell to rule until the Reformed Baptist church came along.

I recommend you check out this website http://www.philvaz.com/apologetics, starting with this article: http://www.philvaz.com/apologetics/a56.htm

There are other sources that rebuke James White's position on other topics, but I'll leave that alone for now. It only takes a short web search to find them. You and I may never agree, but we can both strive to find the one Truth that Jesus taught. I don't believe it can be found in its entirety in ANY Christian denomination. But then, that goes without saying, as a self professed Roman Catholic.

I apologize for straying off my own topic, but it made the most sense to answer here.

Regards,
Jon

I think you may be misunderstanding why I posted that specific link. I'm asking you to actually bother to listen to it and respond to his points. His group has done a lot of research on this topic, and to dismiss him because he's baptist and debates many issues is interesting. Did you just do a Google search about him? What if I made my decision about the catholic church based on a Google search? If you will not respond to some basic points he makes in this brief interview then maybe you have never thought these issues through enough to be debating them here on a public and non-catholic forum.

[Jon]

I think you may be misunderstanding why I posted that specific link. I'm asking you to actually bother to listen to it and respond to his points. His group has done a lot of research on this topic, and to dismiss him because he's baptist and debates many issues is interesting. Did you just do a Google search about him? What if I made my decision about the catholic church based on a Google search? If you will not respond to some basic points he makes in this brief interview then maybe you have never thought these issues through enough to be debating them here on a public and non-catholic forum.

Sean,

Took me a few weeks to respond due to work travel obligations. I finally had the time to listen to the more than hour long discussion which isn't quite a "brief interview". After all that, he never really answered the question I asked other than saying "well the Holy Spirit inspired those books and it just happened by osmosis (paraphrasing but he had no solid argument)". This is a weak argument at best. There are many who claim the Truth and sadly do not represent it. It's a shame that after talking with so many apologists that James White is still blind in his perception of the true meaning of the Bible.

Have you had a chance to listen to the link I posted? Do you have any comments?

Jon

[Jon]

John,

You do seem like you have a problem with authority. It's understandable, as most of us are prideful enough that we don't want to admit we don't have control of the Truth, but I fear you fall into some classical errors of Protestant theology.

There is no such thing as "basic and major doctrines". This is a fallacy of many protestants. There is only one Truth. Please show me in the Bible where it says "well, this is the important stuff, as long as you agree on this it's ok to disagree with all that 'little stuff'". This is not a teaching of the Church, it is a justification created by men to justify that thousands of denominations share the same Truth, but this is an error. If you do not believe it is an error, please tell me who can judge what is a "major doctrine" and what is a "minor doctrine". How are we to judge?

Is the Roman Catholic Church the only final say on proper interpretation of the Bible? Yes. And, if you're upset about that, then maybe you have feelings of a prideful theologian and think you can interpret the Bible on your own. This is the greatest deceit that the Devil has created since the 1500s. To give man the power to interpret on his own without help from the True Church is to give the Devil free reign to sway the minds of millions by subtle changes in the Truth. He's been at this longer than we have, and he's very good at it, better than any of us. So, if you're so very sure that I am wrong, with every fiber in your being, I ask you, please consider that you are being fooled by the best trickster that ever existed. He wants you to disagree with me, because he has you exactly where he wants you, so sure to deny the Truth without an open mind that you have no choice but to throw out the possibility that the Catholic Church might be right, for whatever reason. If the Catholic Church is wrong, you go to heaven anyway, but if they're right, you're in store for eternal torment. Isn't it worth your soul to reconsider their position?

My prayers are with you,
Jon

[Apollos]

There is no such thing as "basic and major doctrines". This is a fallacy of many protestants.

What about Justin Martyr, who tells us that Christians disagreed over the millennium, or Irenaeus who tells us that Christians disagreed over where the dead go, or Africanus and Melito who disagreed over the apocrypha - yet all agreed in the necessity of holding to the rule of faith (the apostles' creed)? Didn't they make a distinction?

Is the Roman Catholic Church the only final say on proper interpretation of the Bible? Yes.

Who says? On what basis do you make this claim? Simply stating it doesn't help anyone - why should the Protestant - or any one else - accept your statement? What is the authority or basis for it?

[Jon]

There is no such thing as "basic and major doctrines". This is a fallacy of many protestants.

What about Justin Martyr, who tells us that Christians disagreed over the millennium, or Irenaeus who tells us that Christians disagreed over where the dead go, or Africanus and Melito who disagreed over the apocrypha - yet all agreed in the necessity of holding to the rule of faith (the apostles' creed)? Didn't they make a distinction?

Is the Roman Catholic Church the only final say on proper interpretation of the Bible? Yes.

Who says? On what basis do you make this claim? Simply stating it doesn't help anyone - why should the Protestant - or any one else - accept your statement? What is the authority or basis for it?

Apollos,

I am not an expert on the two people you mentioned, although a quick search does not show anything obvious that gives them a voice in an official Catholic council. Catholic dogma and doctrine are typically spelled out officially. Individuals that are Catholic do not always speak for what the Church officially teaches. All Catholics agree on the fundamental dogmas of the Church (like the Apostles Creed you mention).

I answered the question about Bible interpretation in response to John. Clearly it is not possible to justify this answer in a few short sentences online. If I could try, though, I base this on the fact that the Catholic Church formally defined, with the help of the Holy Ghost, what books were to be in the New Testament. They also kept them safe for a long time with uncountable monks who copied the Bible word for word before the printing press was invented.

The question you need to ask yourself is "why would someone who came into the world 1500 years after Christ suddenly have the correct interpretation of the Bible? Does it make sense that Christ would found a Church and let them be wrong about major issues of Faith for all that time? If you do believe that, then why did the history of the Church not simply change to one new interpretation? Why are there thousands of different interpretations of the Bible? If there is only one Truth, how can all be correct? How do you choose Baptist, Lutheran, Presbyterian, Evangelical? They can't all be right, only one can be right. Denominations do not make sense - a house divided amongst itself does not stand. So, to go back to basics, what was the only Church around after Christ until the Great Western Schism and later the Reformation? The answer is the Catholic Church. She defined the Books of the Bible with the help of the Holy Ghost. She kept them safe until the 11th century and then until Luther in the 16th. Shouldn't SHE have the only fully correct interpretation of the Bible?

From my standpoint, it is illogical to think otherwise. Simply put, no one except the Catholic Church has the historical background to claim that they were taught directly by the Apostles. I am sure there are arguments against this claim, and I am happy to hear them. It is by the authority of the only Church in existence when Christ was on Earth that I make this claim about proper interpretation of the Bible.

Jon

[Apollos]

I am not an expert on the two people you mentioned, although a quick search does not show anything obvious that gives them a voice in an official Catholic council. Catholic dogma and doctrine are typically spelled out officially. Individuals that are Catholic do not always speak for what the Church officially teaches. All Catholics agree on the fundamental dogmas of the Church (like the Apostles Creed you mention).

Hi Jon,
I don't think you need to be an expert on them - my only point is that the fathers themselves distinguished basic and major doctrines from less important ones, and you see to do so yourself by mentioning fundamental dogmas like the Apostles' creed.

[jriccitelli]

Q. You do seem like you have a problem with authority. (Mon Oct 31)
I sure do! Peter did too; But Peter and the apostles answered, "We must obey God rather than men… 31 "He is the one whom God exalted to His right hand… 32 "And we are witnesses of these things; and so is the Holy Spirit, whom God has given to those who obey Him."
The Catholic Church turns Peter into the rock (Assuming on the misunderstanding of ‘one’ verse in Matt. 16), when there is a mountain of scripture that would deny anyone such a title, or position. This idea of Papel authority began in Rome,and not in the first century. It is not biblical since it is in opposition to everything God has revealed from the beginning, that is Moses and the Prophets.

God has a problem with authority also;
Exodus 33:21 Then the LORD said, "Behold, there is a place by Me, and you shall stand there on the rock;
Numbers 20:8 "Take the rod; and you and your brother Aaron assemble the congregation and speak to the rock before their eyes, that it may yield its water. You shall thus bring forth water for them out of the rock and let the congregation and their beasts drink. "Give ear, O heavens, and let me speak; And let the earth hear the words of my mouth. 2 "Let my teaching drop as the rain, My speech distill as the dew, As the droplets on the fresh grass And as the showers on the herb.3 "For I proclaim the name of the LORD; Ascribe greatness to our God! 4 "The Rock! His work is perfect, For all His ways are just; A God of faithfulness and without injustice, Righteous and upright is He. 5 "They have acted corruptly toward Him, They are not His children, because of their defect; But are a perverse and crooked generation.6 "Do you thus repay the LORD, O foolish and unwise people? Is not He your Father who has bought you? He has made you and established you.7 "Remember the days of old, Consider the years of all generations. Ask your father, and he will inform you, Your elders, and they will tell you.
Deuteronomy 32 "The Rock! His work is perfect, For all His ways are just; A God of faithfulness and without injustice, Righteous and upright is He….13 "He made him ride on the high places of the earth, And he ate the produce of the field; And He made him suck honey from the rock, And oil from the flinty rock,15 "But Jeshurun grew fat and kicked-- You are grown fat, thick, and sleek-- Then he forsook God who made him, And scorned the Rock of his salvation.18 "You neglected the Rock who begot you, And forgot the God who gave you birth.
1 Samuel 2:2 "There is no one holy like the LORD, Indeed, there is no one besides You, Nor is there any rock like our God.
Psalms 62:2 He only is my rock and my salvation, My stronghold; I shall not be greatly shaken… 6 He only is my rock and my salvation, My stronghold; I shall not be shaken.
Isaiah 17:10 For you have forgotten the God of your salvation And have not remembered the rock of your refuge. Therefore you plant delightful plants And set them with vine slips of a strange god.
Isaiah 33:16 He will dwell on the heights, His refuge will be the impregnable rock; His bread will be given him, His water will be sure. (My bread is from the rock!)
Isaiah 44:8 'Do not tremble and do not be afraid; Have I not long since announced it to you and declared it? And you are My witnesses. Is there any God besides Me, Or is there any other Rock? I know of none.'
Matthew 7:9 Or what man is there among you who, when his son asks for a loaf, will give him a stone? (Why would God give us a man, when we need a Rock?)
Matthew 7:24 …"Therefore everyone who hears these words of Mine and acts on them, may be compared to a wise man who built his house on the rockMatthew 21:42 … Jesus said to them, "Did you never read in the Scriptures, 'The stone which the builders rejected, This became the chief corner stone; This came about from the Lord, And it is marvelous in our eyes'?
Romans 9:33 … just as it is written, "Behold, I lay in Zion a stone of stumbling and a rock of offense, And he who believes in Him will not be disappointed."
1 Corinthians 10:4 … and all drank the same spiritual drink, for they were drinking from a spiritual rock which followed them; and the rock was Christ.

Q. Please show me in the Bible where it says "well, this is the important stuff, as long as you agree on this it's ok to disagree with all that 'little stuff” (Mon Oct 31)
"This is the great and foremost commandment. 39 "The second is like it, 'You shall love your neighbor as yourself.' 40 "On these two commandments depend the whole Law and the Prophets." (Matt.22:38-39)
"Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you tithe mint and dill and cummin, and have neglected the weightier provisions of the law: justice and mercy and faithfulness; but these are the things you should have done without neglecting the others. (Matthew 23:23)
For I determined to know nothing among you except Jesus Christ, and Him crucified
(1 Corinthians 2:2)
Therefore leaving the elementary teaching about the Christ, let us press on to maturity, not laying again a foundation of repentance from dead works and of faith toward God, (Hebrews 6:1)