Subject: Sola Scriptura supported by bible? |
Bible Note: Church History is one of many complexities. You have different cultures and idealogies pursuing to benefit themselves. This subject will always be debatable. The Greek Orthodox Church, Roman Catholics, Protestants and many othes have their own views on the authority of the Bible and the books which belong. What we all seem to forget is that man does not have authority of God, we have responsibility of God. It is that same authority man thought it had that enslaved people for the color of thier skin (and saying God authorized it). That same so called authority this day abuses people who are helpless and in need (saying God authorized it). Many of us must realize that the content of the bile, especially the NT was handed down orally, memorized and read aloud in the communities. There was no need to write it down. Then and only then was there a need when the apostles and teachers were being killed off by the Romans or whomever. Ah, we must pass down our history and testimony of Jesus. Therefore let us write (in Latin it means scripture)! So what happens, everyone starts writing down what they remember, even the same goes for the OT. Basically, edits are made and copies of copies are made. So naturally some words get missed, translated incorreclty; some passages don't exist in other texts, etc., etc. For hundreds years, Deuteronomy was thought to be penned by Moses. Now how the hell can someone pen their own death before it happens? Has anyone ever studied the process of canonization? It didn't happen overnite...took hundreds of years from the Hebrew Tanakh to the Protestant Bible. So which canon is correct? There are more than just two you know. Here is a list: The Protestants, Roman Catholics and Greek Orthodox Church agree on 27 books in the NT, while the Syrian Church recoginized only 22. The Ethiopian Orthodox Church recognizes the 27 and "8" additional books. The Jewish Tanakh and the Protestant Bible have the same number of books, but guess what, they are in different order. Does that matter as well? As for the NT, the Roman Catholic, Eastern Churches and Ethiopian Orthodox Churches claim more additional NT books. We have to accept the fact that Canonization changed over the years! The Muratorian Canon, the earliest list of books judged as Scripture didn't even contain the Book of Hebrews. It took nearly 400 years for an official canon to be reached at the Council of Trent in 1546. That is a fact! When I look back, I think about God's timing. The only reason the KJV is considered authorized is because England was the dominant power at that time. Now what if the Spaniards or French where...would it be different or would God not change the course of history? Here is a chronology of the Canon process: * Composition (manuscripts were written either as a recording of oral stories and teachings or as original documents) * Community (manuscripts were read, circulated, and revised within the religious communities) * Criteria (certain manuscripts became accepted as authoritative scripture within the religious communities-- different groups accepted different scriptures) * Collection (scriptures were gathered together in single scrolls, codices, and later in books-- the physical manner of collecting scriptures also had an influence on canonical decisions) * Canon (a defined group of scriptures in a single collection became accepted by a certain religious community as The Bible-- different groups chose different canons). Well I think I have said enough. This debate/discussion will go on until Christ returns. But on that note I'll drop this in regards to divine inspiration. Is 1 Cor 7:12 Pauls opinion or inspiration by God? peace |