What's with this thing called THE APOCRYPHA?

  • Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.

    You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

CoreIssue

Well-Known Member
Oct 15, 2018
10,032
2,023
113
USA
christiantalkzone.net
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Gregory the Great, late 6th early 7th century was bishop of rome and wrote a letter to Eusebius of Thessalonica regarding John of Constantinople because John wanted to use a name for himself 'universal bishop'. Gregory in his day called it a 'new and temerarious name of superstition..' If a universal bishop was 'new' in the 7th century it certainly was unknown in previous centuries.

Yep, pseudo-isidore, donation of constantine.....Lots of false history.
The title is taken from pagan Romanism and was in use centuries before Christ.
 

Preacher4Truth

Well-Known Member
Feb 15, 2019
2,252
2,861
113
USA
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Wow. The Epistle of Barnabas. Hmmm. If I eat no unclean meat, and am circumcised I gain eternal life, and Paul is deceived by Satan. Basically then Saul was already headed to eternal life, since that was his practice, then he believed in Christ, who he truly is, John 8:24; and will now burn in hell.

Told my wife and daughter they'll never make it because they can't be circumcised so they fried up some bacon to celebrate. A BLT sounds really good right now.

Yeah, we need the apocryphal books because we're still thirsty and seeking...not...at least not me. Anyone else? :)

Apparently, some are still hungering, thirsting, and seeking. Hmmm...
 

Nondenom40

Active Member
May 21, 2019
493
246
43
Illinois
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Wow. The Epistle of Barnabas. Hmmm. If I eat no unclean meat, and am circumcised I gain eternal life, and Paul is deceived by Satan. Basically then Saul was already headed to eternal life, since that was his practice, then he believed in Christ, who he truly is, John 8:24; and will now burn in hell.

Told my wife and daughter they'll never make it because they can't be circumcised so they fried up some bacon to celebrate. A BLT sounds really good right now.

Yeah, we need the apocryphal books because we're still thirsty and seeking...not...at least not me. Anyone else? :)

Apparently, some are still hungering, thirsting, and seeking. Hmmm...
Whatever agrees with their theology, they use.
 

stunnedbygrace

Well-Known Member
Aug 18, 2018
12,397
12,048
113
USA
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
You are entitled to your opinion, of course. The Epistle of Barnabas adds back what was already there in the first century. The Didache was a record of what some of those teachings were, some of which we no longer have. The E of B is where the Didache got what is now missing. I have never liked the Catholic Church doing my thinking for me, so humbly disagree with your opinion.

I read Barnabas after Willie posted it. I saw more of a sermon than something that should be considered scripture.

The oddest part to me was where he spoke of hyenas being able to be male and female...
 

Wafer

Active Member
May 16, 2019
189
108
43
84
Yuma
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Isaiah 55:11 King James Version (KJV)
11 So shall my word be that goeth forth out of my mouth: it shall not return unto me void, but it shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall prosper in the thing whereto I sent it.

God Himself maintains the integrity of His word.
 

BreadOfLife

Well-Known Member
Jan 2, 2017
20,915
3,368
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Ya you cited it earlier. It doesn't say what you think. Read the rest of what i posted..maybe a couple of times so it sinks in.
Really? Show us the word 'scripture' you just said is there. Thats called eisegesis. Youre injecting into the text something that isn't there.

Sure he is clear on the apocrypha. I've already cited it twice where he says its 'not in the canon'. Can't get anymore clearer than that.

Well, i don't know what catholic site your quoting. But it would help to dig a hair deeper. This isn't Jerome's quote as you suggested above. This is a letter by Epiphanius to John, Bishop of Jerusalem. Whoops. Jerome was asked to translate it into latin from the greek. So, since your 'another quote from Jerome' isn't, your point is moot.

A couple of things to keep in mind when reading ecf's on pretty much anything, especially the canon.
1. There was no set canon in the early church, none. Your church made its (incorrect) dogmatic declaration regarding the canon at trent, 1546.
2. Jerome very clearly rejected the apocrypha. Something i've cited twice now and you have yet to refute.


The books in the early church were separated into two classes basically; canon and ecclesiastical. Your apocrypha isn't part of the canon.
WRONG.

The Books of the Old and New Testaments were canonized at the Councils of Rome, Hippo and Carthage at the end of the 4th century. All Trent did was CLOSE the Canon that already existed for 1200 years before that.

Secondly, as I stated earlier – in Jerome’s OWN words – he did NOT reject the Deuterocanonical Books. He merely conveyed the Jewish objections to them - and even went so far as to say that anybody who attributes these objections to HIM (Jerome) was a “fool and a slanderer”. This is a point that YOU keep ignoring . . .

I gave you the following quote from Jerome, in which he refers to the Book of Sirach as “SCRIPTURE” – which you completely ignored.
“Does not the SCRIPTURE say: 'Burden not thyself above thy power'[SIRACH 13:2] Jerome, To Eustochium, Epistle 108 (A.D. 404), in NPNF2, VI:207

Here is the "Damasine list", issued by Pope Damasus I at the Council of Rome (382 AD):

“It is likewise decreed: Now, indeed, we must treat of the divine Scriptures: what the universal Catholic Church accepts and what she must shun. The list of the Old Testament begins: Genesis, one book; Exodus, one book: Leviticus, one book; Numbers, one book; Deuteronomy, one book; Jesus Nave, one book; of Judges, one book; Ruth, one book; of Kings, four books [First and Second Books of Kings, Third and Fourth Books of Kings]; Paralipomenon, two books; One Hundred and Fifty Psalms, one book; of Solomon, three books: Proverbs, one book; Ecclesiastes, one book; Canticle of Canticles, one book; likewise, Wisdom, one book; Ecclesiasticus (Sirach), one book; Likewise, the list of the Prophets: Isaiah, one book; Jeremias, one book; along with Cinoth, that is, his Lamentations; Ezechiel, one book; Daniel, one book; Osee, one book; Amos, one book; Micheas, one book; Joel, one book; Abdias, one book; Jonas, one book; Nahum, one book; Habacuc, one book; Sophonias, one book; Aggeus, one book; Zacharias, one book; Malachias, one book. Likewise, the list of histories: Job, one book; Tobias, one book; Esdras, two books; Esther, one book; Judith, one book; of Maccabees, two books.

Likewise, the list of the Scriptures of the New and Eternal Testament, which the holy and Catholic Church receives: of the Gospels, one book according to Matthew, one book according to Mark, one book according to Luke, one book according to John. The Epistles of the Apostle Paul, fourteen in number: one to the Romans, two to the Corinthians [First Epistle to the Corinthians and Second Epistle to the Corinthians], one to the Ephesians, two to the Thessalonians [First Epistle to the Thessalonians and Second Epistle to the Thessalonians], one to the Galatians, one to the Philippians, one to the Colossians, two to Timothy [First Epistle to Timothy and Second Epistle to Timothy], one to Titus, one to Philemon, one to the Hebrews.

Likewise, one book of the Apocalypse of John. And the Acts of the Apostles, one book. Likewise, the canonical Epistles, seven in number: of the Apostle Peter, two Epistles [First Epistle of Peter and Second Epistle of Peter]; of the Apostle James, one Epistle; of the Apostle John, one Epistle; of the other John, a Presbyter, two Epistles [Second Epistle of John and Third Epistle of John]; of the Apostle Jude the Zealot, one Epistle. Thus concludes the canon of the New Testament.”


From Wikipedia: Council of Rome - Wikipedia

The Council of Rome was a meeting of Catholic Church officials and theologians which took place in 382 under the authority of Pope Damasus I, the current bishop of Rome. It was one of the fourth century councils that "gave a complete list of the canonical books of both the Old Testament and the New Testament."[1]
 

VictoryinJesus

Well-Known Member
Jan 26, 2017
9,581
7,857
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
If I eat no unclean meat, and am circumcised I gain eternal life,

Haven’t read this book yet but have downloaded from this thread for later. Hesitate here “eat no unclean meat” “be circumcised” and gain life. Similar to Isaiah 52:1 Awake, awake; put on thy strength, O Zion; put on thy beautiful garments, O Jerusalem, the holy city: for henceforth there shall no more come into thee the uncircumcised and the unclean.

O Zion ...put on thy beautiful garments ...can only mean one. “For hereforth” of putting on thy beautiful garments...there shall NO MORE come into thee the uncircumcised and the unclean.

Do we see no more the uncircumcised and the unclean entering in? Entering where ...or Who?

Deuteronomy 10:16
[16] Circumcise therefore the foreskin of your heart, and be no more stiffnecked.

Eat no unclean meat...
Be circumcised and gain life...

Romans 14:14
[14] I know, and am persuaded by the Lord Jesus, that there is nothing unclean of itself: but to him that esteemeth any thing to be unclean, to him it is unclean.


Acts 10:14-15
[14] But Peter said, Not so, Lord; for I have never eaten any thing that is common or unclean. [15] And the voice spake unto him again the second time, What God hath cleansed, that call not thou common.

Basically then Saul was already headed to eternal life, since that was his practice, then he believed in Christ, who he truly is, John 8:24; and will now burn in hell.

Paul wasn’t headed toward life but toward death...until the Revelation of Jesus Christ. “Eat nothing unclean” “be circumcised” of the foreskin of the heart and gain Life. Where nothing unclean or uncircumcised enters in...

1 Timothy 4:3-4
[3] Forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats, which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving of them which believe and know the truth. [4] For every creature of God is good, and nothing to be refused, if it be received with thanksgiving:

How can a person “eat nothing unclean...be circumcised” ...and gain Life? Only one way and that is the Revelation Of Jesus Christ shown to Paul on the road...
 
  • Like
Reactions: stunnedbygrace

Preacher4Truth

Well-Known Member
Feb 15, 2019
2,252
2,861
113
USA
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Haven’t read this book yet but have downloaded from this thread for later. Hesitate here “eat no unclean meat” “be circumcised” and gain life. Similar to Isaiah 52:1 Awake, awake; put on thy strength, O Zion; put on thy beautiful garments, O Jerusalem, the holy city: for henceforth there shall no more come into thee the uncircumcised and the unclean.

O Zion ...put on thy beautiful garments ...can only mean one. “For hereforth” of putting on thy beautiful garments...there shall NO MORE come into thee the uncircumcised and the unclean.

Do we see no more the uncircumcised and the unclean entering in? Entering where ...or Who?

Deuteronomy 10:16
[16] Circumcise therefore the foreskin of your heart, and be no more stiffnecked.

Eat no unclean meat...
Be circumcised and gain life...

Romans 14:14
[14] I know, and am persuaded by the Lord Jesus, that there is nothing unclean of itself: but to him that esteemeth any thing to be unclean, to him it is unclean.


Acts 10:14-15
[14] But Peter said, Not so, Lord; for I have never eaten any thing that is common or unclean. [15] And the voice spake unto him again the second time, What God hath cleansed, that call not thou common.



Paul wasn’t headed toward life but toward death...until the Revelation of Jesus Christ. “Eat nothing unclean” “be circumcised” of the foreskin of the heart and gain Life. Where nothing unclean or uncircumcised enters in...

1 Timothy 4:3-4
[3] Forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats, which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving of them which believe and know the truth. [4] For every creature of God is good, and nothing to be refused, if it be received with thanksgiving:

How can a person “eat nothing unclean...be circumcised” ...and gain Life? Only one way and that is the Revelation Of Jesus Christ shown to Paul on the road...
Yes, the only way to be "circumcised" and to have "eaten nothing unclean" is to be in Christ, Ephesians 1.
 
  • Like
Reactions: VictoryinJesus

Nondenom40

Active Member
May 21, 2019
493
246
43
Illinois
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
WRONG.

The Books of the Old and New Testaments were canonized at the Councils of Rome, Hippo and Carthage at the end of the 4th century. All Trent did was CLOSE the Canon that already existed for 1200 years before that.
Wrong!
A. All of those councils are local not ecumenical. Hence they have no binding authority on the entire church.
B. Hefel (a roman catholic scholar) says himself that all the decrees of Rome 382 have been lost. Take it up with him.
C. Your own Catholic Encyclopedia says;
The Tridentine decrees from which the above list is extracted was the first infallible and effectually promulgated pronouncement on the Canon, addressed to the Church Universal.
But it sounds like you know more than your catholic scholars. Why aren't you in rome advising your pope?

Secondly, as I stated earlier – in Jerome’s OWN words – he did NOT reject the Deuterocanonical Books. He merely conveyed the Jewish objections to them - and even went so far as to say that anybody who attributes these objections to HIM (Jerome) was a “fool and a slanderer”. This is a point that YOU keep ignoring . . .
I addressed this.

I gave you the following quote from Jerome, in which he refers to the Book of Sirach as “SCRIPTURE” – which you completely ignored.
“Does not the SCRIPTURE say: 'Burden not thyself above thy power'[SIRACH 13:2] Jerome, To Eustochium, Epistle 108 (A.D. 404), in NPNF2, VI:207

Here is the "Damasine list", issued by Pope Damasus I at the Council of Rome (382 AD):

“It is likewise decreed: Now, indeed, we must treat of the divine Scriptures: what the universal Catholic Church accepts and what she must shun. The list of the Old Testament begins: Genesis, one book; Exodus, one book: Leviticus, one book; Numbers, one book; Deuteronomy, one book; Jesus Nave, one book; of Judges, one book; Ruth, one book; of Kings, four books [First and Second Books of Kings, Third and Fourth Books of Kings]; Paralipomenon, two books; One Hundred and Fifty Psalms, one book; of Solomon, three books: Proverbs, one book; Ecclesiastes, one book; Canticle of Canticles, one book; likewise, Wisdom, one book; Ecclesiasticus (Sirach), one book; Likewise, the list of the Prophets: Isaiah, one book; Jeremias, one book; along with Cinoth, that is, his Lamentations; Ezechiel, one book; Daniel, one book; Osee, one book; Amos, one book; Micheas, one book; Joel, one book; Abdias, one book; Jonas, one book; Nahum, one book; Habacuc, one book; Sophonias, one book; Aggeus, one book; Zacharias, one book; Malachias, one book. Likewise, the list of histories: Job, one book; Tobias, one book; Esdras, two books; Esther, one book; Judith, one book; of Maccabees, two books.

Likewise, the list of the Scriptures of the New and Eternal Testament, which the holy and Catholic Church receives: of the Gospels, one book according to Matthew, one book according to Mark, one book according to Luke, one book according to John. The Epistles of the Apostle Paul, fourteen in number: one to the Romans, two to the Corinthians [First Epistle to the Corinthians and Second Epistle to the Corinthians], one to the Ephesians, two to the Thessalonians [First Epistle to the Thessalonians and Second Epistle to the Thessalonians], one to the Galatians, one to the Philippians, one to the Colossians, two to Timothy [First Epistle to Timothy and Second Epistle to Timothy], one to Titus, one to Philemon, one to the Hebrews.

Likewise, one book of the Apocalypse of John. And the Acts of the Apostles, one book. Likewise, the canonical Epistles, seven in number: of the Apostle Peter, two Epistles [First Epistle of Peter and Second Epistle of Peter]; of the Apostle James, one Epistle; of the Apostle John, one Epistle; of the other John, a Presbyter, two Epistles [Second Epistle of John and Third Epistle of John]; of the Apostle Jude the Zealot, one Epistle. Thus concludes the canon of the New Testament.”


From Wikipedia: Council of Rome - Wikipedia

The Council of Rome was a meeting of Catholic Church officials and theologians which took place in 382 under the authority of Pope Damasus I, the current bishop of Rome. It was one of the fourth century councils that "gave a complete list of the canonical books of both the Old Testament and the New Testament."[1]
Wikipedia?? You disappoint me. First the council in Rome 382 was called by emperor Theodosius not Damasus. It was actually a council called to Constantinople originally. Only after they arrived were they invited to Rome, by way of Milan. Damasus merely hosted the council at Rome. Furthermore, a number of the bishops didn't even go! Some were only obligated to go as far as Constantinople, not Rome so they sent only three bishops, the others stayed in Constantinople. (A History of the Councils of the Church; Vol 2 pp 377ff

And as i said, the decrees of 382 are lost. But believe wikipedia if you want. Whatever agrees with you right? Romes first infallible dogmatic decree on its canon was 1546. You should really read your own sources. A prot shouldn't have to school you on your own body of literature..
 
Last edited:

1stCenturyLady

Well-Known Member
Jun 26, 2018
5,253
2,136
113
76
Tennessee
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
I read Barnabas after Willie posted it. I saw more of a sermon than something that should be considered scripture.

The oddest part to me was where he spoke of hyenas being able to be male and female...

That is a fact. Look it up. When the female is born she has a male part that eventually falls off after about a year. One of the segments on this video is about the hyena. Very interesting.


I don't know what you would call commands and a prophecy, but odd you should call them just a sermon.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: stunnedbygrace

stunnedbygrace

Well-Known Member
Aug 18, 2018
12,397
12,048
113
USA
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
What I'm saying is I don't see a prophecy in there. Doesn't mean there isn't one, I just didn't see it. I saw him refer to a lot of verses, but no prophecy.

Very interesting about hyenas!
 

BreadOfLife

Well-Known Member
Jan 2, 2017
20,915
3,368
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Wrong!
A. All of those councils are local not ecumenical. Hence they have no binding authority on the entire church.
B. Hefel (a roman catholic scholar) says himself that all the decrees of Rome 382 have been lost. Take it up with him.
C. Your own Catholic Encyclopedia says;
But it sounds like you know more than your catholic scholars. Why aren't you in rome advising your pope?

I addressed this.

Wikipedia?? You disappoint me. First the council in Rome 382 was called by emperor Theodosius not Damasus. It was actually a council called to Constantinople originally. Only after they arrived were they invited to Rome, by way of Milan. Damasus merely hosted the council at Rome. Furthermore, a number of the bishops didn't even go! Some were only obligated to go as far as Constantinople, not Rome so they sent only three bishops, the others stayed in Constantinople. (A History of the Councils of the Church; Vol 2 pp 377ff

And as i said, the decrees of 382 are lost. But believe wikipedia if you want. Whatever agrees with you right? Romes first infallible dogmatic decree on its canon was 1546. You should really read your own sources. A prot shouldn't have to school you on your own body of literature..
First of all - I referenced an objective, SECULAR source like wikipedia simply to show that I wasn't getting all of my information from Catholic sources - which you seem to have a problem with. I can use Catholic sources exclusively, if you prefer . . .

Secondly - even if you reject the Council of Rome's decree in 382 - you STILL have the Hippo (393) and Carthage (397) to contend with - which were 1200 years before Trent. The bishops at Carthage wrote at the end of their document, "But let Church beyond sea (Rome) be consulted about CONFIRMING THIS CANON". There were 44 bishops, including St. Augustine who signed the document.
So, you see - local council or not - it was confirmed by the Pope.

Thirdly - Can you show me WHERE I claimed in my last post that Theodosius didn't convene the Council of Rome?? I said that the decree was made under the AUTHORITY of Pope Damasus - which is a fact. He presided over the Council - he didn't merely "host" it. SAME can be said for the Council of Nicaea, which was convened by Constantine but was under the Authority of Pope Sylvester I.

Finally, as I stated earlier - the Council of Trent officially CLOSED the Canon of Scripture that had been declared 1200 years before.
 

Nondenom40

Active Member
May 21, 2019
493
246
43
Illinois
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
First of all - I referenced an objective, SECULAR source like wikipedia simply to show that I wasn't getting all of my information from Catholic sources - which you seem to have a problem with. I can use Catholic sources exclusively, if you prefer . . .
Where did i say i had a problem with catholic sources? I'm using your own sources against you. Focus

Secondly - even if you reject the Council of Rome's decree in 382
You haven't shown a decree from rome 382, not a reliable one anyway. Why does your own catholic history scholarship say of the rome 382 council, 'all acts/decrees are lost'? Then here comes that bastion of new scholarship wikipedia which anyone can edit that conveniently says oh heres a decree from rome 382. Right, and i have a bridge for sale. Heres a direct quote from wikipedia;

"Don't be afraid to editanyone can edit almost every page,"

I'm sure i can find your 'decree' on wikipedia and add Alice in Wonderland to the canon of 382. There ya go, another inspired book to add to your canon.

- you STILL have the Hippo (393) and Carthage (397) to contend with - which were 1200 years before Trent. The bishops at
And i've already posted a quote from your own Catholic Encyclopedia stating Trent was the FIRST dogmatic declaration of the canon for the ENTIRE church...that'd be 1546. Hippo and Carthage were local councils
Carthage wrote at the end of their document, "But let Church beyond sea (Rome) be consulted about CONFIRMING THIS CANON". There were 44 bishops, including St. Augustine who signed the document.
So, you see - local council or not - it was confirmed by the Pope.
First, the decrees of 382 are lost, we don't have them. Second, we don't have the originals for carthage either. There was a council of carthage in 419 whose canon was ratified. That letter was sent to the bishop of rome, but it was sent to other bishops as well. NOT just to rome.

Also, Augstine was the one that said here is the standard, not a pope.
Finally, as I stated earlier - the Council of Trent officially CLOSED the Canon of Scripture that had been declared 1200 years before.
And as i've stated from your own catholic encyclopedia, trent was the FIRST dogmatic declaration of the canon for the entire church. No one was bound to any canon prior to trent.
 

BreadOfLife

Well-Known Member
Jan 2, 2017
20,915
3,368
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Where did i say i had a problem with catholic sources? I'm using your own sources against you. Focus

You haven't shown a decree from rome 382, not a reliable one anyway. Why does your own catholic history scholarship say of the rome 382 council, 'all acts/decrees are lost'? Then here comes that bastion of new scholarship wikipedia which anyone can edit that conveniently says oh heres a decree from rome 382. Right, and i have a bridge for sale. Heres a direct quote from wikipedia;

"Don't be afraid to editanyone can edit almost every page,"

I'm sure i can find your 'decree' on wikipedia and add Alice in Wonderland to the canon of 382. There ya go, another inspired book to add to your canon.

And i've already posted a quote from your own Catholic Encyclopedia stating Trent was the FIRST dogmatic declaration of the canon for the ENTIRE church...that'd be 1546. Hippo and Carthage were local councils
First, the decrees of 382 are lost, we don't have them. Second, we don't have the originals for carthage either. There was a council of carthage in 419 whose canon was ratified. That letter was sent to the bishop of rome, but it was sent to other bishops as well. NOT just to rome.

Also, Augstine was the one that said here is the standard, not a pope.
And as i've stated from your own catholic encyclopedia, trent was the FIRST dogmatic declaration of the canon for the entire church. No one was bound to any canon prior to trent.
The Canon of Scripture declared at the Councils of Rome (382), Hippo (393) and Carthage (397) were DOCTRINAL decrees.
You are conflating a Doctrinal matter with a Dogmatic one. Of course the Canon wouldn't be declared a matter of DOGMA until it was closed. THAT'S why the dogmatic decree at Trent.

A Dogmatic decree is something that is binding on the believer as being necessary for salvation. It is an incontrovertible truth revealed by God. A OPEN Canon cannot be incontrovertible until it is CLOSED, Einstein.

As for Augustine's comment from Hippo, he said to let the Church in ROME be consulted about confirming the Canon that they decreed under the guidance of the Holy Spirit. HE wasn't the standard. He recognized the Authority of the Bishop of Rome.

If you don't understand how Councils work - just admit it . . .
 

CoreIssue

Well-Known Member
Oct 15, 2018
10,032
2,023
113
USA
christiantalkzone.net
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
The Canon of Scripture declared at the Councils of Rome (382), Hippo (393) and Carthage (397) were DOCTRINAL decrees.
You are conflating a Doctrinal matter with a Dogmatic one. Of course the Canon wouldn't be declared a matter of DOGMA until it was closed. THAT'S why the dogmatic decree at Trent.

A Dogmatic decree is something that is binding on the believer as being necessary for salvation. It is an incontrovertible truth revealed by God. A OPEN Canon cannot be incontrovertible until it is CLOSED, Einstein.

As for Augustine's comment from Hippo, he said to let the Church in ROME be consulted about confirming the Canon that they decreed under the guidance of the Holy Spirit. HE wasn't the standard. He recognized the Authority of the Bishop of Rome.

If you don't understand how Councils work - just admit it . . .
For clarification, Catholic councils are only for Catholicism.

Biblical Christians do not consider them authoritative in any manner.

Just like the EFC titles were a Catholic invention concerning the very early Catholic leaders.

The biblical canon was already known before any Catholic council.
 

Nondenom40

Active Member
May 21, 2019
493
246
43
Illinois
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
The Canon of Scripture declared at the Councils of Rome (382), Hippo (393) and Carthage (397) were DOCTRINAL decrees.
You are conflating a Doctrinal matter with a Dogmatic one. Of course the Canon wouldn't be declared a matter of DOGMA until it was closed. THAT'S why the dogmatic decree at Trent.
Youre arguing in circles. You've been refuted by your own catholic sources. Rome 382 has no surviving acts/decrees. Hippo has none. Any canon declared at carthage 397 wasn't read and affirmed until carthage 419. Read some history. Its not my job to do your homework. And read something other than wikipedia.

A Dogmatic decree is something that is binding on the believer as being necessary for salvation. It is an incontrovertible truth revealed by God. A OPEN Canon cannot be incontrovertible until it is CLOSED, Einstein.
Great so you admit hippo and carthage was open, hence non binding. Your church didn't close its canon until trent;

"The Tridentine decrees from which the above list is extracted was the first infallible and effectually promulgated pronouncement on the Canon, addressed to the Church Universal."

As for Augustine's comment from Hippo, he said to let the Church in ROME be consulted about confirming the Canon that they decreed under the guidance of the Holy Spirit. HE wasn't the standard. He recognized the Authority of the Bishop of Rome.
The letter wasn't written JUST to rome, it was sent to bishops elsewhere. You have nothing.

If you don't understand how Councils work - just admit it . . .
If you don't understand the history surrounding the councils, just admit it. Pick up a book and ditch wiki...
 

BreadOfLife

Well-Known Member
Jan 2, 2017
20,915
3,368
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
For clarification, Catholic councils are only for Catholicism.
Biblical Christians do not consider them authoritative in any manner.
Just like the EFC titles were a Catholic invention concerning the very early Catholic leaders.

The biblical canon was already known before any Catholic council.
There were multiple canons (lists) of Scripture in the Early Church. MOST included Books that are now considered "Apocrypha" and others were incomplete.
It took the Church to infallibly declare the Canon under the guidance of the Holy Spirit (John 16:12-15).
 

BreadOfLife

Well-Known Member
Jan 2, 2017
20,915
3,368
113
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Youre arguing in circles. You've been refuted by your own catholic sources. Rome 382 has no surviving acts/decrees. Hippo has none. Any canon declared at carthage 397 wasn't read and affirmed until carthage 419. Read some history. Its not my job to do your homework. And read something other than wikipedia.

Great so you admit hippo and carthage was open, hence non binding. Your church didn't close its canon until trent;

"The Tridentine decrees from which the above list is extracted was the first infallible and effectually promulgated pronouncement on the Canon, addressed to the Church Universal."

The letter wasn't written JUST to rome, it was sent to bishops elsewhere. You have nothing.

If you don't understand the history surrounding the councils, just admit it. Pick up a book and ditch wiki...
The signed document from Hippo was sent to the Church at ROME for approval. Whether or not it was also sent to Bishops in other locations is irrelevant.

As for my single use of wikipedia - I already told you it was simply to show an objective secular source.
You're simply using it as a smokescreen to divert the conversation away from the fact that your argument just doesn't work.

Finally - I'm not "admitting" anything about Hippo and Carthage. This is just another diversionary tactic because I obliterated your argument with the facts. The Canon was an open Canon until it was closed at Trent. That doesn't mean that it wasn't declared 1200 years BEFORE Trent. It just wasn't closed.
 

Nondenom40

Active Member
May 21, 2019
493
246
43
Illinois
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
The signed document from Hippo was sent to the Church at ROME for approval. Whether or not it was also sent to Bishops in other locations is irrelevant.
Of course you think its irrelevant. But its not. Catholics love to ignore whats right in front of them when they don't like the implications.
As for my single use of wikipedia - I already told you it was simply to show an objective secular source.
What else have you cited? Other than your opinion?
You're simply using it as a smokescreen to divert the conversation away from the fact that your argument just doesn't work.
Your desperation is showing. I've answered questions, provided scholarly sources and refuted your weak opinions...repeatedly. You still haven't answered my citation of Jerome where he specifically calls out your apocrypha and says they are not in the canon. Then you cited another letter that Jerome didn't even write! Catholics don't care too much for studying or primary sources. Copy n paste from catholic websites...thats how most of them study.

Finally - I'm not "admitting" anything about Hippo and Carthage.
Then youre living in denial. Your own catholic scholars reject your personal conclusions. But by all means, keep your head in the sand.
This is just another diversionary tactic because I obliterated your argument with the facts. The Canon was an open Canon until it was closed at Trent. That doesn't mean that it wasn't declared 1200 years BEFORE Trent. It just wasn't closed.
Uh huh. Keep thinking that. I provide facts which have not been refuted. We get wikipedia and personal opinion in return. But catholics do love their faux victories don't they.