Sola Scriptura and Canon

[phattonez]

For those who support Sola Scriptura, how do you decide what is an inspired book of the Bible? And how do you know which translations and versions are good? How does any of this work without tradition?

 

[SBu]

For those who support Sola Scriptura, how do you decide what is an inspired book of the Bible? And how do you know which translations and versions are good? How does any of this work without tradition?

I guess only the ones that were chosen by counsels of men were inspired by God.

 

[tosca1]

The New Testament authors - and even Jesus Christ - repeatedly quoted from the Old Testament, which means that yes, the Scriptures is the base of authority. Most, if not all translations, are the same when it comes to major issues.

 

[Goshin]

I dunno. I just go with it. :mrgreen:

 

[phattonez]

The New Testament authors - and even Jesus Christ - repeatedly quoted from the Old Testament, which means that yes, the Scriptures is the base of authority. Most, if not all translations, are the same when it comes to major issues.

How do you know which New Testament authors were inspired? You know that there were other gospels, right?

 

[phattonez]

Also, Maccabees and Purgatory: that's a big issue.

 

[tosca1]

How do you know which New Testament authors were inspired? You know that there were other gospels, right?

Other gospels? Are you referring to Q?

Will continue....gotta go.

 

[phattonez]

Other gospels? Are you referring to Q?

Will continue....gotta go.

The gospel of Peter, for example. This was rejected from canon by the early Church.

 

[tosca1]

How do you know which New Testament authors were inspired? You know that there were other gospels, right?

It would all depend whether one believes Jesus Christ is the Messiah that was prophesied from the Old Testaments. If one believes that Jesus Christ is the indeed the Messiah, then one can only believe that the Apostles who wrote the New Testament were indeed inspired by God/Holy Spirit.

These Apostles were with Him, and were specially chosen by Him. They served a purpose for the start and spread of Christianity. Their writings are all in harmony, because they all witnessed.

Look at it this way, if God meant the Bible to be the Authoritative Book that mankind may have some understanding about His love for us, the Messiah and our salvation....you can bet that the Bible will endure.

 

[tosca1]

The gospel of Peter, for example. This was rejected from canon by the early Church.

From what I understand, it's been rejected because even though the authorship was attributed to the Apostle Peter, it's likely to have been written in second century ( based on some historical errors). The Gospel of Peter isn't recognized as a legitimate or authentical writing.

This is not to confuse it with the Epistles of Peter.

Inspired works wouldn't deviate or contradict....they will understandably be consistent with other inspired works in the Bible.

 

[tosca1]

Also, Maccabees and Purgatory: that's a big issue.

Was the Apocrypha ever quoted by Jesus or by any of the Apostles in the New Testament?

There are 260 quotations from the Old Testament. Not one of them touched the Apocrypha.


Furthermore, it is significant to note that the Jews recognized the Old Testament Canon yet didn't recognize the Apocrypha. Why is it significant?

Romans 3:1-2
1 Then what advantage has the Jew? Or what is the benefit of circumcision?
2 Great in every respect. First of all, that they were entrusted with the oracles of God.

Because....they're entrusted with the oracles of God.

Please read this excerpt.

Jesus' references the Old Testament: from Abel to Zechariah

Jesus referenced the Jewish Old Testament canon from the beginning to the end and did not include the Apocrypha in his reference. "From the blood of Abel to the blood of Zechariah, who perished between the altar and the house of God; yes, I tell you, it shall be charged against this generation,’" (Luke 11:51).

"The traditional Jewish canon was divided into three sections (Law, Prophets, Writings), and an unusual feature of the last section was the listing of Chronicles out of historical order, placing it after Ezra-Nehemiah and making it the last book of the canon. In light of this, the words of Jesus in Luke 11:50-51 reflect the settled character of the Jewish canon (with its peculiar order) already in his day. Christ uses the expression "from the blood of Abel to the blood of Zechariah," which appears troublesome since Zechariah was not chronologically the last martyr mentioned in the Bible (cf. Jer. 26:20-23). However, Zechariah is the last martyr of which we read in the Old Testament according to Jewish canonical order (cf. II Chron. 24:20-22), which was apparently recognized by Jesus and his hearers."1

This means that the same Old Testament canon, according to the Jewish tradition, is arranged differently than how we have it in the Protestant Bible today. This was the arrangement to which Jesus was referring when he referenced Abel and Zechariah, the first and last people to have their blood shed -- as listed in the Old Testament Jewish canon. Obviously, Jesus knew of the Apocrypha and was not including it in his reference.

Jesus references the Old Testament: The Law, the Prophets, and the Psalms

Catholics sometimes respond by saying that the Old Testament is referred to in three parts: the Law, the Prophets, and the Writings. It is these writings that are sometimes said to include the Apocrypha. But this designation is not found in the Bible. On the contrary, Jesus referenced the Old Testament and designated its three parts as the Law, the Prophets, and the Psalms, not as the Law, the Prophets, and the Writings.

"Now He said to them, "These are My words which I spoke to you while I was still with you, that all things which are written about Me in the Law of Moses and the Prophets and the Psalms must be fulfilled," (Luke 24:44).

So we see that the designation offered by the Roman Catholics is not the same designation found in the Bible and their argument is invalid as their argument is incorrect. Nevertheless, even if it did say "writings" it would not include the Apocrypha for the above-mentioned reasons.

Church Fathers

Did the Church fathers recognized the Apocrypha as being Scripture? Roman Catholics strongly appeal to Church history but we don't find a unanimous consensus on the Apocrypha. Jerome (340-420) who translated the Latin Vulgate which is used by the RC church, rejected the Apocrypha since he believed that the Jews recognized and established the proper canon of the Old Testament. Remember, the Christian Church built upon that recognition. Also, Josephus the famous Jewish historian of the First Century never mentioned the Apocrypha as being part of the canon either. In addition, "Early church fathers like Origen, Cyril of Jerusalem, Athanasius, and the great Roman Catholic translator Jerome spoke out against the Apocrypha."2 So, we should not conclude that the Church fathers unanimously affirmed the Apocrypha. They didn't.

http://carm.org/apocrypha-it-scripture

Books of the Apocrypha

•1 and 2 Esdras
•Tobit*
•Judith*
•Wisdom of Solomon*
•Sirach* (also called Ecclesiasticus)
•Baruch*
•Letter of Jeremiah
•Song of the Three Young Men
•Susanna
•Bel and the Dragon
•Prayer of Manasseh
•1 and 2 Maccabees*
•Additions to the book of Esther*
•Additions to the book of Daniel*

http://christianity.about.com/od/glossary/qt/Apocrypha.htm

 

[tosca1]

Question: What does the Bible say about purgatory?


Answer: The simple answer to this question is that the Bible says nothing about Purgatory. The doctrine of purgatory is not a Scriptural concept. We do, however, see much discussion in God’s Word about the only two destinations for those who have died: Heaven and Hell.


Jesus spoke significantly of both, and yet there is never a mention of a third place, an interim location where man undergoes further purification. The concept of purgatory implies that Christ’s work on the cross was incomplete and insufficient to save us from judgement for our sins.

We know, however, that the full redemptive work of Christ was accomplished on the cross, just as Christ Himself declared, “It is finished”. (John 19:30)

What does the Bible Say About Purgatory? | Christian Apologetics and Research Ministry


If His death on the cross is insufficient for our salvation....what then is the meaning of Holy Communion?

 

[phattonez]

It would all depend whether one believes Jesus Christ is the Messiah that was prophesied from the Old Testaments. If one believes that Jesus Christ is the indeed the Messiah, then one can only believe that the Apostles who wrote the New Testament were indeed inspired by God/Holy Spirit.

These Apostles were with Him, and were specially chosen by Him. They served a purpose for the start and spread of Christianity. Their writings are all in harmony, because they all witnessed.

Look at it this way, if God meant the Bible to be the Authoritative Book that mankind may have some understanding about His love for us, the Messiah and our salvation....you can bet that the Bible will endure.

How do you know that the books that claim to be written by the Apostles were actually written by them? And furthermore, 2 of the Gospels and the nearly all of the epistles were written by non-Apostles. How do you know that they are inspired without tradition?

 

[phattonez]

From what I understand, it's been rejected because even though the authorship was attributed to the Apostle Peter, it's likely to have been written in second century ( based on some historical errors). The Gospel of Peter isn't recognized as a legitimate or authentical writing.

This is not to confuse it with the Epistles of Peter.

Inspired works wouldn't deviate or contradict....they will understandably be consistent with other inspired works in the Bible.

Wouldn't deviate or contradict what? You have to start somewhere. Remember that the early Church had no New Testament, so how did they decide where to start? You can't use sola scriptura to decide which books to include in the New Testament.

 

[phattonez]

What does the Bible Say About Purgatory? | Christian Apologetics and Research Ministry


If His death on the cross is insufficient for our salvation....what then is the meaning of Holy Communion?

Purgatory is for unsatisfied temporal punishment. God is a just God, and forgiveness does not mean that we are free from any punishment for our sins. His forgiveness keeps us from Hell.

 

[phattonez]

Was the Apocrypha ever quoted by Jesus or by any of the Apostles in the New Testament?

There are 260 quotations from the Old Testament. Not one of them touched the Apocrypha.


Furthermore, it is significant to note that the Jews recognized the Old Testament Canon yet didn't recognize the Apocrypha. Why is it significant?



Because....they're entrusted with the oracles of God.

Please read this excerpt.



The Apocrypha: Is it scripture? | Christian Apologetics and Research Ministry



Apocrypha - What Is The Apocrypha?

You're going off of the basis of rabbis centuries after the death of Christ who rejected it because it wasn't written in Hebrew, except that oh wait, it actually was in Hebrew as the Dead Sea Scrolls showed us.

Also, Jesus quoted the deutero-Canonical books PLENTY:

Did Jesus quote deterocanonical books like Sirach and Maccabees as scripture? - Yahoo! Answers

 

[tosca1]

Purgatory is for unsatisfied temporal punishment. God is a just God, and forgiveness does not mean that we are free from any punishment for our sins. His forgiveness keeps us from Hell.

Where does it say that? How come purgatory's not mentioned in the Bible? Didn't Jesus talk about Judgement Day? So how come souls are already being punished prior to Judgement Day?

 

[tosca1]

You're going off of the basis of rabbis centuries after the death of Christ who rejected it because it wasn't written in Hebrew, except that oh wait, it actually was in Hebrew as the Dead Sea Scrolls showed us.

Also, Jesus quoted the deutero-Canonical books PLENTY:

Did Jesus quote deterocanonical books like Sirach and Maccabees as scripture? - Yahoo! Answers

The New Testament and the Deuterocanonicals (1/4)

The following article (in four parts), examines some 78 alleged uses of the deuterocanonicals or apocryphal writings in the New Testament.

Matthew 6 NKJV - Do Good to Please God -

 

[phattonez]

Where does it say that? How come purgatory's not mentioned in the Bible? Didn't Jesus talk about Judgement Day? So how come souls are already being punished prior to Judgement Day?

Ah, that's the rub, Maccabees. Also Jesus mentioned it:

"Jesus speaks of purgatory in Matthew 18:23-35. While speaking on forgiveness He says: "The kingdom of heaven may be likened to..." and then He tells a story about a king who forgave a servant's large debt. That same servant refused to forgive a much smaller amount of a fellow servant. The king then threw the first servant into prison "until he should pay back the whole debt." Jesus then says, "So will my Heavenly Father do to you, unless each of you forgives his brother from his heart." What prison is there in the kingdom of heaven where you might remain until your debt is satisfied? Purgatory is the only thing that makes any sense."

StayCatholic.com - Purgatory

 

[phattonez]

Matthew 6 NKJV - Do Good to Please God -

It seems now like you're stretching to try to ignore it. But again, you miss my main argument. How can you use a series of books that you don't know whether they are inspired because you can't use something to prove that the thing itself is inspired to prove that something else is inspired? There is nowhere to start to say that something is inspired using sola scriptura. You need tradition, otherwise you have no scripture to start from.

 

[tosca1]

You're going off of the basis of rabbis centuries after the death of Christ who rejected it because it wasn't written in Hebrew, except that oh wait, it actually was in Hebrew as the Dead Sea Scrolls showed us.

Like I said, inspired works wouldn't deviate or contradict....they will understandably be consistent with other inspired works in the Bible. There wouldn't be any errors if it's inspired.


Errors in the Apocrypha
Errors in the Apocrypha | Christian Apologetics and Research Ministry

 

[tosca1]

It seems now like you're stretching to try to ignore it. But again, you miss my main argument. How can you use a series of books that you don't know whether they are inspired because you can't use something to prove that the thing itself is inspired to prove that something else is inspired? There is nowhere to start to say that something is inspired using sola scriptura. You need tradition, otherwise you have no scripture to start from.

The Bible has a more deep-seated tradition than any other written document. It goes back to about 4,000 years.

So I repeat what I've wrote before:

It would all depend whether one believes Jesus Christ is the Messiah that was prophesied from the Old Testaments. If one believes that Jesus Christ is the indeed the Messiah, then one can only believe that the Apostles who wrote the New Testament were indeed inspired by God/Holy Spirit.

These Apostles were with Him, and were specially chosen by Him. They served a purpose for the start and spread of Christianity. Their writings are all in harmony, because they all witnessed.

Look at it this way, if God meant the Bible to be the Authoritative Book that mankind may have some understanding about His love for us, the Messiah and our salvation....you can bet that the Bible will endure.

And it has endured.


Let me put it this way.
If God exists, then anything is possible, including the inspiration of the Scriptures.

If God doesn't exists, then nothing matters. Including the inspired words of a non-existent God.

Btw, do you believe in God?

 

[tosca1]

There aren't many options in Christianity. It's either you're a believer or a non-believer.
If one doesn't believe in Jesus Christ, then he doesn't believe The Word.

 

[tosca1]

Ah, that's the rub, Maccabees. Also Jesus mentioned it:


StayCatholic.com - Purgatory

Parables aren't meant to build doctrines on. Furthermore, that parable still doesn't say anything about purgatory. It's about forgiveness and compassion.


Here's the whole verse that pertains to that.

Matt 18
23 Therefore the kingdom of heaven is like a certain king who wanted to settle accounts with his servants. 24 And when he had begun to settle accounts, one was brought to him who owed him ten thousand talents. 25 But as he was not able to pay, his master commanded that he be sold, with his wife and children and all that he had, and that payment be made. 26 The servant therefore fell down before him, saying, ‘Master, have patience with me, and I will pay you all.’ 27 Then the master of that servant was moved with compassion, released him, and forgave him the debt.

28 “But that servant went out and found one of his fellow servants who owed him a hundred denarii; and he laid hands on him and took him by the throat, saying, ‘Pay me what you owe!’ 29 So his fellow servant fell down at his feet[d] and begged him, saying, ‘Have patience with me, and I will pay you all.’[e] 30 And he would not, but went and threw him into prison till he should pay the debt. 31 So when his fellow servants saw what had been done, they were very grieved, and came and told their master all that had been done. 32 Then his master, after he had called him, said to him, ‘You wicked servant! I forgave you all that debt because you begged me. 33 Should you not also have had compassion on your fellow servant, just as I had pity on you?’ 34 And his master was angry, and delivered him to the torturers until he should pay all that was due to him.

35 “So My heavenly Father also will do to you if each of you, from his heart, does not forgive his brother his trespasses.”[f]

That parable mentioned that part of the punishment for not paying his debts, the king ordered that he, his wife and children would all be sold!

That line is problematic. Why the wife and child be sold? Do they also pay for his sin?
That would CONTRADICT Ezekiel.

Ezekiel 18

18 The Lord’s word came to me: 2 What do you mean by this proverb of yours about the land of Israel: “When parents eat unripe grapes, the children’s teeth suffer”? 3 As surely as I live, says the Lord God, no longer will you use this proverb in Israel! 4 All lives are mine; the life of the parent and the life of the child belong to me. Only the one who sins will die.

19 You will say, “Why doesn’t the child bear his parent’s guilt?” The child has acted justly and responsibly. The child kept all my regulations and observed them. The child will surely live. 20 Only the one who sins will die. A child won’t bear a parent’s guilt, and a parent won’t bear a child’s guilt. Those who do right will be declared innocent, and the wicked will be declared guilty.

That's simply a parable to make the disciples and followers understand - and stress the importance of forgiveness and compassion. It has nothing to do with purgatory.
Line 35 sums up the message of that parable:
35 “So My heavenly Father also will do to you if each of you, from his heart, does not forgive his brother his trespasses."

God will show you the same mercy that you show others.

 

[nota bene]

There aren't many options in Christianity. It's either you're a believer or a non-believer.
If one doesn't believe in Jesus Christ, then he doesn't believe The Word.

Yes, the Word. I've always wondered, given that Jesus was literate, why He chose not to write anything down. Haven't you? And haven't you wondered how the early Church survived? Christ left a living Church and a living Word.