Catholicism vs Protestantism
- Thread starter Roughsoul1991
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
B
We believe that the apostle Paul can hear our requests.
The story of Abraham and the rich man and the other scripture I gave shows that.
That does not mean he will answer us or talk back to us. I don't know if he would if we asked.
That is up to God. But all we do is ask for his intercession.
That is why we pray to Saints in heaven, not to have a chat.
The story of Abraham and the rich man and the other scripture I gave shows that.
That does not mean he will answer us or talk back to us. I don't know if he would if we asked.
That is up to God. But all we do is ask for his intercession.
That is why we pray to Saints in heaven, not to have a chat.
The Holy Spirit, working in and through the apostles, their companions, as well as Christians in apostolic churches, decided what the canon of Scripture would be.
We know from the New Testament that for Jesus of Nazareth, His apostles, and all Palestinian Jews, the canon of the Old Testament was already established. It consisted on just 24 books in the Hebrew Bible, and not one of the apocryphal books was included.
We also know from the 2nd epistle of Peter, that MORE THAN HALF of the New Testament was regarded by God and the apostles as canonical (the epistles of Paul). So by the 2nd century AD, the canon of Scripture was complete and already established, as seen in the Syriac translation of the Bible (the Peshitta).
We know from the New Testament that for Jesus of Nazareth, His apostles, and all Palestinian Jews, the canon of the Old Testament was already established. It consisted on just 24 books in the Hebrew Bible, and not one of the apocryphal books was included.
We also know from the 2nd epistle of Peter, that MORE THAN HALF of the New Testament was regarded by God and the apostles as canonical (the epistles of Paul). So by the 2nd century AD, the canon of Scripture was complete and already established, as seen in the Syriac translation of the Bible (the Peshitta).
-
1
- Show all
B
That the Canon of the OT was only 24 books is highly disputable but I'm not going to get into that argument now.
You can only use 2Peter to establish that Paul's letters were canonical after 2Peter has been accepted as canonical and that was in the late 4th century.
There were many disputes about what was accepted and what was not.
My question was when and by whom?. By that I mean definitively not just some books.
You can only use 2Peter to establish that Paul's letters were canonical after 2Peter has been accepted as canonical and that was in the late 4th century.
There were many disputes about what was accepted and what was not.
My question was when and by whom?. By that I mean definitively not just some books.
One particularly well-known Catholic method of exploitation in the Middle Ages was the practice of selling indulgences, a monetary payment of penalty which, supposedly, absolved one of past sins and/or released one from purgatory after death. Not only were indulgences Biblically wrong they were morally wrong: stealing money from poor people to give them false hope of something they could not deliver on. Pope Pius V abolished the sale of indulgences in 1567.
In his theses, Martin Luther condemned the excesses and corruption of the Roman Catholic Church, especially the papal practice of asking payment—called “indulgences”—for the forgiveness of sins.
In his theses, Martin Luther condemned the excesses and corruption of the Roman Catholic Church, especially the papal practice of asking payment—called “indulgences”—for the forgiveness of sins.
-
1
- Show all
B
Yes. According to the Encyclopedias Brittanica "The earliest extant versions of the New Testament Peshitta date to the 5th century ad and exclude The Second Letter of Peter, The Second Letter of John, the Third Letter of John, The Letter of Jude, and The Revelation to John, which were not canonical in the Syrian church."
-
1
- Show all
The various baptisms in the Gospels although in Christ they becme one, they are distinct in how they immerse the receiver into the life of the one offering a baptism. Baptism in the Lord Jesus washed by means of the spoken Word. John's baptism with water prepared the receiver to have ears to hear Jesus and so be able to receive baptism in the Lord Jesus which is received in the form of words. Then the Baptism Jesus Himself received from the Father is incorporated into the one baptism of our faith by which we are plunged into the death and resurrection of Our Lord.
The earlier versions did not have the 27 books, but the later versions did.
Syriac New Testament
Of the New Testament, attempts at translation must have been made very early, and among the ancient versions of New Testament Scripture the Syriac in all likelihood is the earliest. It was at Antioch, the capital of Syria, that the disciples of Christ were first called Christians, and it seemed natural that the first translation of the Christian Scriptures should have been made there. Some research, however, goes to show that Edessa, the literary capital, could have been the place.
If we could accept the somewhat obscure statement of Eusebius[4] that Hegesippus "made some quotations from the Gospel according to the Hebrews and from the Syriac Gospel," we should have a reference to a Syriac New Testament as early as 160-80 AD, the time of that Hebrew Christian writer. One thing is certain, that the earliest New Testament of the Syriac church lacked not only the Antilegomena – 2 Peter, 2 and 3 John, Jude, and the Apocalypse – but the whole of the Catholic Epistles. These were at a later date translated and received into the Syriac Canon of the New Testament, but the quotations of the early Syrian Fathers take no notice of these New Testament books.
From the 5th century, however, the Peshitta containing both Old Testament and New Testament has been used in its present form only as the national version of the Syriac Scriptures. The translation of the New Testament is careful, faithful and literal, and the simplicity, directness and transparency of the style are admired by all Syriac scholars and have earned for it the title of "Queen of the versions." [1]
http://textus-receptus.com/wiki/Peshitta#Syriac_Old_Testament
The *tradition* (if you can even call it that) was of the apostolic churches. Not all the churches may have had all the books at the same time, so that should be taken into account. But the books of the New Testament were being circulated among all the churches of that time.
Syriac New Testament
Of the New Testament, attempts at translation must have been made very early, and among the ancient versions of New Testament Scripture the Syriac in all likelihood is the earliest. It was at Antioch, the capital of Syria, that the disciples of Christ were first called Christians, and it seemed natural that the first translation of the Christian Scriptures should have been made there. Some research, however, goes to show that Edessa, the literary capital, could have been the place.
If we could accept the somewhat obscure statement of Eusebius[4] that Hegesippus "made some quotations from the Gospel according to the Hebrews and from the Syriac Gospel," we should have a reference to a Syriac New Testament as early as 160-80 AD, the time of that Hebrew Christian writer. One thing is certain, that the earliest New Testament of the Syriac church lacked not only the Antilegomena – 2 Peter, 2 and 3 John, Jude, and the Apocalypse – but the whole of the Catholic Epistles. These were at a later date translated and received into the Syriac Canon of the New Testament, but the quotations of the early Syrian Fathers take no notice of these New Testament books.
From the 5th century, however, the Peshitta containing both Old Testament and New Testament has been used in its present form only as the national version of the Syriac Scriptures. The translation of the New Testament is careful, faithful and literal, and the simplicity, directness and transparency of the style are admired by all Syriac scholars and have earned for it the title of "Queen of the versions." [1]
http://textus-receptus.com/wiki/Peshitta#Syriac_Old_Testament
The *tradition* (if you can even call it that) was of the apostolic churches. Not all the churches may have had all the books at the same time, so that should be taken into account. But the books of the New Testament were being circulated among all the churches of that time.